COUNCIL CONSEIL
OF EUROPE DE L'EUROPE
COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS
CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl (79)302
CONCLUSIONS
OF THE 302nd MEETING
OF THE MINISTERS' DEPUTIES
HELD IN STRASBOURG FROM 26 TO 30 MARCH 1979
STRASBOURG
COUNCIL OF EUROPE
CONSEIL DE L' EUROPE
COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS
Strasbourg, 23 April 1979 Confidential CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Corrigendum
CONCLUSIONS OF THE 302ND MEETING
OF THE MINISTERS' DEPUTIES
(held in Strasbourg from 26 to 30 March 1979)
CORRIGENDUM
Item XVIII : On page 65, under sub-heading II: "Ad hoc terms of reference for the CDAS and the CAHDM", please replace the intervention by the Representative of Switzerland by the following text:
"A propos of the draft ad hoc terms of reference for the Steering Committee for Social Affairs, the Representative of Switzerland proposed that only points 8A and 8C.I.1 and 2 be retained, points 8B and 8C.II being dropped."
59.146 02.2
COUNCIL OF EUROPE
CONSEIL DE L' EUROPE
COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS
Strasbourg, 23 April 1979 Confldential CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Corrigendum
CONCLUSIONS OF THE 302ND MEETING
OF THE MINISTERS' DEPUTIES
(held in Strasbourg from 26 to 30 March 1979)
CORRIGENDUM
Item XVIII : On page 65, under sub-heading II: "Ad hoc terms of reference for the CDAS and the CAHDM", please replace the intervention by the Representative of Switzerland by the following text:
"A propos of the draft ad hoc terms of reference for the Steering Committee for Social Affairs, the Representative of Switzerland proposed that only points 8A and 8C.I.1 and 2 be retained, points 8B and 8C. II being dropped."
59.146 02.2
CONFIDENTIAL
- i - CM/Del/Concl(79)302
SUMMARY
Page
1. Adoption of the agenda 9
2. State of written procedures 11
II.
Political and General Policy Questions
3. Committee of Ministers - Preparation of the 64th Session 13
4. Joint Committee - Preparation 17
5. Situation in Cyprus 19
6. Human rights in Uruguay - Written Question No. 217 by Mr. Boucheny 21
7. Freedom of movement of the members of the Parliamentary Assembly in the member States of the Council of Europe - Written Question No. 215 25
8. Situation in the Mediterranean Area (General Policy of the Council of Europe) - Recommendation 853 27
Human Rights
9. Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case Luedicke, Belkacem and Koç - Application of Article 54 of the European Convention on Human Rights 33
10. Arthur Hilton against the United Kingdom - Decision to be taken under Article 32 of the European Convention on Human Rights 35 CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - ii -
Page
11. Draft statement on race and racial prejudice of UNESCO - Written Question No. 211 by Mr. Portheine 37
Legal Questions
12. The Hague Academy of International Law 41
13. Resolutions of the Committee of Ministers 45
14. Committee of Experts on violence in present-day society (PC-R-VS) - Observer status of the Commission of the European Communities 47
15. Committee on the Mass Media (CAHMM) - Report of the 4th meeting (Strasbourg, 11-15 December 1978) 49
16. Ad hoc Conference of European Ministers responsible for Public Security 57
17. Terrorism in Europe - Recommendation 852 and Order No. 376 59
Economic and Social Questions
18. Implementation and revision of the European Social Charter - Recommendation 839 65
19. Tripartite Conference on Employment 69
20. Relations with management and labour 71
Press and Information
21. 30th Anniversary of the Council of Europe 81
Education, Culture and Sport
22. Organisation of a 3rd Joint Conference (Council of Europe/European Conference of Ministers of Transport) on Road Safety Education in Schools 85
23. European Cultural Co-operation - Recommendation 850 89 CONFIDENTIAL
- iii - CM/Del/Concl(79)302
Page
Administrative Questions
Board24. Procedure foofr the appointmenAuditorst of member s of th91e
25. Compatibility between Resolutions(77)23 and (77)24 95
26. Travel expenses of government experts 97
27. Ad hoc Committee of Administrative Experts (CAHEA)
a. Presence of representatives of the Staff Committee in meetings of the CAHEA 99
b. 8th Activity Report 101
c. 9th Activity Report 103
d. 18th Meeting Report 105
28. European Parliament - Facilities 107
29. Preparation of forthcoming meetings 109 30. Other business a. Dialogue with the Secretary General 111
b. CDCC's programme for 1979 - Meeting of experts on the mobility of students, research workers and teachers (London, 24-26 April
c. Rules for technical assistance relating to the integrated conservation of the cultural heritage of monuments and sites 121
d. Composition of the Budget Committee and geographical distribution of category A posts - Suggestions by the Belgian delegation 123
e. Special Representative of the Council of Europe for National Refugees and Over- population 125
f. Stimulating Committee 127 III. Items carried forward from previous meetings
31. Draft Convention on the conservation of European wildlife and natural habitats 129 CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - iv -
Page
APPENDIX I: Agenda of the 302nd meeting of the Ministers' Deputies (A level) a1
APPENDIX II: Draft agenda of the 303rd meeting of the Ministers' Deputies (A level) a7
APPENDIX III: Decision No. CM/126/300379 (all Steering (item XIII) Committees and the CAHRS, CAHED, CAHPC, CAHID, CAHMM and CAHAR) a11
APPENDIX IV: Decision No. CM/125/290379 (PC-R-VS) a13 (item XIV)
APPENDIX V: Decision No. CM/127/300379 (CDAS) a15 (item XVIII)
APPENDIX VI: Decision No. CM/128/300379 (CAHDH) a17 (item XVIII) CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 1 -
The 302nd meeting of the Deputies was opened on Monday 26 March 1979 at 3.45 pm with Mr J.F.E. Breman, Deputy for the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands, in the Chair.
PRESENT
AUSTRIA Mr O. Maschke Mr U. Hack
BELGIUM Mr A.J. Vranken Mr J. Coene
CYPRUS Mr C.N. Pilavachi
DENMARK Mr P.A. von der Hüde Mr B. Christensen
FRANCE Mr J. Cazeneuve Mr T. de Kerros
FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY Mr K.A. Hampe Mr H. Meincke Mrs R. Lässing
GREECE Mr N. Kambalouris Mr P. Caracassis Mr A. Mallias
ICELAND Mrs H. Bergs
IRELAND Mr M. Flynn
ITALY Mr M. Pisa Mr N. Cappello Mr G. Ceruti
LIECHTENSTEIN HSH Prince Nicolas of Liechtenstein
LUXEMBOURG Mr G. Heisbourg
MALTA Mr R. Calleja CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 2 -
NETHERLANDS Mr J.F.E. Breman Chairman Mr P. Lagendijk Miss M.M. Bot
NORWAY Miss K. Ohm, Vice-chairman Mr K. Paus
PORTUGAL Mr J.P. Cutileiro Mr J.D. Barata Mr J.P. Carvalho
SPAIN Mr J.L. Messía Mr J.A. Yáñez-Barnuevo Mr A.J. Jiménez Abascal
SWEDEN Mr B. Åkerren Mr M. Åberg
SWITZERLAND Mr A. Wacker Mr R. Serex Mr T. Feller
TURKEY Mr S. Günver Mr O. Akbel Mr S. Ozsoy Mr S. Umar
UNITED KINGDOM Mr D. Cape Miss R. Vining CONFIDENTIAL
- 3 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302
The Chairman referred to the cloud that had been cast over the preceding week by the death of two great men and great Europeans, Jean Monnet and Pierre Schneiter.
Jean Monnet had certainly been one of the outstanding men of the century. Architect of Franco-German reconciliation, father-founder of Europe, he had given his whole life to the European cause. The part his ideas had played in the birth of the European Community and his constant dedication to the unity of Europe were known to all. He had put his vision, his imagination and his great gifts as a statesman into the task of building Europe and, if Europe existed today, it was largely due to the idealist he had always been. The Council of Europe had been represented at Mr. Monnet's funeral at Montfort l'Amaury on Tuesday 20 March 1979 by the Prime Minister of the Netherlands.
Pierre Schneiter, who had died at Reims on 18 March 1979 at the age of 84, had played a decisive part in Council of Europe affairs. He had been a great European but also a great Frenchman who had occupied high posts in his own country, having been Sub-Prefect, Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, a member of the Schumann Cabinet and Minister for Health. He had represented France at the United Nations in 1952-53 and In 1955 had been elected President of the National Assembly. In 1954, by reason of his firm belief in Europe, he had been appointed by the Committee of Ministers Special Representative of the Council of Europe for National Refugees and Over-Population in Europe, in which capacity he had carried out much research and contributed in particular to the framing of the European Convention on the Legal Status of Migrant Workers. At his instigation, the Committee of Ministers had adopted scores of Resolutions on the problems of migrant workers and their families. In 1956 he had been made Chairman of the Council of Europe Resettlement Fund for National Refugees and Over-population in Europe, which he had been instrumental in setting up.
The previous week also, the United Kingdom Ambassador at The Hague, Sir Richard Sykes, had been the victim of a savage terrorist attack. Acts of the kind perpetrated against Sir Richard were immeasurably despicable and deserved nothing but total contempt. The Committee asked the Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom to convey to his authorities the expression of its horror of acts of this kind and to Sir Richard's family their sincerest condolences and sympathy. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 4 -
The Secretary General said that the death of Pierre Schneiter had been deeply felt by the Secretariat. He had attended the funeral on 21 March and had paid a tribute to Mr. Schneiter in a special communiqué. Pierre Schneiter's part in setting up the Resettlement Fund and in the difficult task of framing the European Convention on the Legal Status of Migrant Workers bore witness to the stature and dedication of this great European. His memory would remain alive in the Council of Europe and encourage it to persevere in its mission. He had received a letter of condolence from the Deputy Secretary General of OECD, which he read out.
He also wished to associate himself with the tribute paid to Jean Monnet. There were two kinds of men: those who wanted to be something and those who wanted to achieve something. All his life Jean Monnet had shown that he was one of the latter kind. Much of what put Europe on the map today would not have existed without the unflagging devotion of this great man.
Lastly, he expressed to the Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom his indignation and horror at the brutal murder of the Ambassador to the Netherlands, Sir Richard Sykes.
The Representative of France thanked the Chairman and the Secretary General for the tributes they had paid to two French personalities.
A minute's silence was observed.
During the meeting, the Representative of Spain announced that the Strasbourg Faculty of Legal and Social Sciences had decided to confer on King Juan Carlos of Spain the degree of Doctor Honoris Causa for his part in re-establishing the rule of law in his country. The King had signified his acceptance and would come to Strasbourg for the conferring, probably in the first week of October.
The Chairman announced that the Committee would no longer be having the pleasure of the company of Mr. J.C. Bützow, who had been posted elsewhere. He asked the Permanent Representative of Denmark to thank Mr. Bützow on the Committee's behalf and to wish him every success in his new post. Mr. Bützow had been replaced by Mr. Christensen, whom he welcomed in the Committee's name.
The Representative of Denmark promised to transmit the Committee's thanks and good wishes to Mr. Bützow. CONFIDENTIAL
- 5 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302
The Chairman welcomed the new Director of Education, Culture and Sport, Mr. Marschall von Bieberstein, remarking that in recent months the Committee had more than once had occasion to realise that the Council of Europe was an organisation of a special kind - that was to say that it had two separate organs, with a Secretariat serving them both. If the Council was to function, its two organs and the Secretariat had to work together in close concertation. Without this concertation the Organisation would lose its lifeblood and eventually wither away. He hoped that his message would be heard and wished the new Director success in the efficient accomplishment of his task.
The Director thanked the Chairman for his words of welcome.
The Chairman said at the close of the meeting that he still had a melancholy task to perform, namely to say farewell to the Representative of Greece.
Mr. Kambalouris, after a lengthy period in Strasbourg was about to return to his country, which he had worthily represented; he alone, among the members of the Committee, had the eloquence that warranted the name of Demosthenes. Mr. Kambalouris would be remembered by the Committee not only as a fine speaker and a consumate politician, but principally as a dedicated democrat. The Committee wished him a happy homecoming, and hoped to see him again soon, possibly in a different setting and another capacity.
As dean of the Permanent Representative, the Permanent Representative of Switzerland also wanted to say a few words. The dean was in fact not himself but the Greek Representative, because Mr. Kambalouris was representing his country at the Council as early as 1956, subsequently taking up other duties. He was certainly one of the few Permanent Representatives to have been a member of the Committee of Ministers and its Chairman twice over. The Representative of Greece had always impressed him by his political fervour, his heartfelt commitment to Europe, his dynamism and youthfulness. He was sure that Mr. Kambalouris had too much vitality to settle for a retirement of idleness, but that he would continue to devote himself to the cause for which he had always striven, namely that of Europe. He thanked him, assured him of his deep friendship and his best wishes for the future. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 6 -
The Representative of Spain was also anxious to join in the tributes to Mr. Kambalouris; he was immensely grateful to him for the understanding attitude he had adopted towards Spain before it became a member of the Council of Europe.
The Secretary General spoke on behalf of the Secretariat, with which for a variety of reasons Mr. Kambalouris had had very close relations. He had been one of the most active members of the Committee of Ministers in political matters. He had at all times given voice to his principal concern, which was that the Council of Europe Statute should be realised - and that concern bore witness to his deep-seated faith in Europe. He hoped that his retirement would be pleasurable and active, and that it would bring him again to Strasbourg.
The Representative of Greece said he was greatly moved by his colleagues' expressions of sympathy. He was overwhelmed, and felt unable to live up to the name of Demosthenes that had so kindly been ascribed to him. Having twice served as the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers, as the Swiss Representative had recalled, he was familiar with the difficulties of that office. Throughout his period in Strasbourg he had striven to apply the oldest of Greek rules, namely "moderation in all things". It was an innate tendency of his and his compatriots to be carried away, to give free rein to the dictates of their hearts. While complying with this, his tactics had always been to achieve a synthesis, first presenting the thesis and the antithesis.
In his heart he could not dissociate the Council of Europe from Strasbourg, a city he cherished fondly.
He said that he had much appreciated the words of the Representative of Switzerland, not only because they were uttered by a very old friend, but because they came from a citizen of Switzerland, a country which should serve as an example of democracy and unity to the whole of Europe. He would like to take the opportunity, since reference had been made to his profound European faith of saying what he expected of Europe. In his view, it must be neither a supranational Europe nor a federated Europe, nor a Europe "à la carte", but a transnational Europe. Moreover, "community" Europe gave the closest idea of what should be this Europe of tomorrow which was but a perpetual future, "an ever closer union" (Preamble to the Treaty of Rome).
Turning to the Representative of Turkey, he thanked him for his words, which he appreciated particularly since they came from his most formidable "adversary" in certain discussions. In the battles of eloquence which had taken place there had never been any personal animosity, but merely his deep commitment to a just cause which he had to defend. CONFIDENTIAL
- 7 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302
His thanks went also to the Representative of Spain, who was part of the same Mediterranean group as himself. It had been a pleasure and a duty to help him prior to Spain's accession to the Council of Europe.
Lastly, he turned to the Secretary General, whom he wished to thank for co-operating with him during his difficult task in Strasbourg. Of course, their views had not always coincided but disagreement had given rise to progress. He had always appreciated the Secretary General's solid virtues as a European.
His gratitude extended to the Secretariat in general, which he thanked for its help and support, and he wanted to say to those who were not present - those who worked behind the scenes - how much he had appreciated their help. CONFIDENTIAL
- 9 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item I
I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
The Representative of Turkey announced that his delegation's attitude regarding item V (Situation in Cyprus) remained unchanged in respect both of the substance and the form.
The Secretary to the Committee proposed that item XXV of the agenda (Compatibility between Resolutions(77)23 and (77)24) be deferred because the reference document was not yet available.
The Representative of Switzerland said that his authorities were bitterly disappointed at the fact that the Secretariat had been unable, in the three months available to it, to prepare the document asked for at the 297th meeting (item XXIII). He urged that this document be circulated at the present meeting.
The Secretary General said that the document was ready in one language, but because of translation and reproduction problems, the Secretariat had been unable to produce it in the two languages.
The Secretary to the Committee added that the delay in preparing the document had also been due to the long illness of the Deputy Director of Administration and Finance.
Decision
The Deputies adopted the agenda of their 302nd meeting (March 1979 - A level) as it appears at Appendix I to these Conclusions, subject to the postponement to their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level) of item XXV and the inclusion under item XXX (Other business) of sub- items (a) to (f). CONFIDENTIAL
- 11 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item II
II. STATE OF WRITTEN PROCEDURES
There was nothing to report under this item. CONFIDENTIAL
- 13 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item III
III. COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS Preparation of the 64th Session (Concl(79)300/IV, CM(79)76)
The Chairman invited his colleagues to resume consideration of the preparation for the 64th Session of the Committee of Ministers in the light of the proposals made by the Secretary General in CM(79)76, and of their discussions at their 300th and 301st meetings.
Progress of European Co-operation
The Chairman noted that it seemed to be the feeling of the Committee that other than dividing this item into three sub-items as suggested by the Secretary General in CM(79)76, some of the ideas set out in that document might be included in the draft annotated agenda.
The Representative of Norway thought that some references could be made to the follow-up to the Declaration on Human Rights. She was also in favour of a reference to point 2(c) in CM(79)76 concerning the enlargement of the European Communities and the direct elections to the European Parliament.
The Representatives of the Federal Republic of Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the United Kingdom said that they would prefer that no mention should be made in the annotated agenda of the follow-up to the Declaration on Human Rights. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 14 - Item III
The Representative of Spain thought that priority should be given in the annotated agenda to point 2(b) of CM(79)76 concerning the development of political exchanges of views. He would favour a first discussion on the question of the Mediterranean at the 64th Session, with further discussion on that matter taking place at the 65th Session. As for point 2(c) he expressed a preference for awaiting the report of the Assembly on this matter before recommending to Ministers that they discuss it themselves.
The Representative of Ireland expressed the hope that the usual reports on developments in EFTA and in the European Communities would be circulated in good time. Similarly, it would be appreciated if the Secretary General could make available in advance his statement to Ministers in this context and also, if convenient, his statement to the Assembly, which would also be meeting at that time.
The Secretary General said that his report to the Assembly was usually drafted at the last minute.
CSCE and the United Nations
The Representative of Switzerland said that his authorities were in favour of further exchanges of views on the CSCE and the United Nations. The exchange on CSCE should concentrate on the preparation for the Madrid meeting. A convenient time might be 18 June 1979, as suggested by the Secretariat. 19 June, or even a date in September, would be convenient for the exchange on the United Nations.
The Representative of Norway said that thought should be given in the preparation of this item to the need for taking stock of the Bonn, Montreux and Valletta meetings. Her authorities were in favour of the Austrian suggestion that there should be an exchange of views on United Nations items related to the CSCE and the dates of 18-19 June 1979 would be acceptable. They were on the whole favourably disposed to the suggestion made by the Austrian delegation at the 63rd Session concerning the possibility of inviting Yugoslavia to take part in some exchanges of views on the CSCE. CONFIDENTIAL
- 15 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item III
The Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany marked his agreement with the inclusion of the CSCE and the United Nations in the provisional agenda. As for the possibility of inviting non-member states such as Yugoslavia to participate in exchanges of views on the CSCE, he thought that it would be premature to take any decisions at this stage.
The Representative of Spain said that it would be appropriate at the Ministerial Session to examine carefully the results of the Valletta meeting and to examine the question of the preparation of the Madrid meeting. He did not think that it would be realistic to envisage the possibility of inviting non-member states to participate in exchanges of views on the CSCE.
The Representative of the Netherlands also voiced hesitations about the advisability of inviting Yugoslavia to exchanges of views.
The Representative of France said that it would be premature to decide on dates for the next exchanges of views. Before taking any decisions on the question of Yugoslavia, it would first be necessary to spell out in detail the conditions for their participation in exchanges of views and to determine whether or not Yugoslavia wished to participate in them.
The Representative of the United Kingdom said that the dates proposed by the Secretariat might cause some difficulties, since the European Council would meet in the same week.
The Representative of Austria said that the Secretariat's suggestions concerning the preparation of the next exchanges of views had been most useful; delegations might wish to suggest to the Chair those topics which might be discussed at future exchanges of views even before taking a decision on actual dates. Referring to the development of relations between the Council of Europe and the United Nations, he thought it would be useful if the Chairman reported on the Secretary General's forthcoming visit to New York on the basis of information he would have received from the Netherlands Mission there. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 16 - Item III
Press communiqué
The Representative of Spain recalled that at the 300th meeting he had informed the Deputies that he would unfortunately not be able to serve on the drafting group for the press communiqué.
Dates of forthcoming sessions
Following a discussion on the possibility of changing the date of the 65th Session, the Chairman noted that there was general agreement to maintain the date of 22 November 1979, which had already been decided on by Ministers at their 63rd Session. The Colloquy would therefore take place in the morning of Friday, 23 November 1979.
The Representative of Switzerland expressed the hope that Parliamentarians from all member countries of the WEU would be present at the Colloquy.
The Chairman noted that there was agreement to recommend to Ministers that the 66th Session of the Committee of Ministers be held on Thursday, 24 April 1980 during the Assembly Spring Session.
Decisions
The Deputies i. agreed to present their suggestions concerning the topics for discussion at the next exchanges of views on the CSCE and the United Nations in good time for their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level); ii. agreed to resume consideration of the preparation of the 64th Session of the Committee of Ministers at their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level) in the light of a draft annotated agenda to be prepared by the Secretariat. CONFIDENTIAL
- 17 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item IV-
IV. JOINT COMMITTEE Preparation (Concl(79)300/VI)
The Chairman invited his colleagues to discuss the draft agenda of the Joint Committee meeting to be held on 28 March 1979 (AS/CM(79)OJ/1).
Candidates for the post of Secretary General
The Chairman said that he would introduce this item and give a factual account of the procedure followed so far and an indication of when the Deputies would adopt the resolution containing the names of the nominated candidates.
Information policy of the Council of Europe
The Chairman said that he, as Chairman of the Working Party on Information Policy, would introduce the item. He would give an historical account of the action taken on the question of information policy since the establishment of the Working Party and then invite the members of the Assembly to comment on specific points arising from the decisions taken by the Deputies at their 297th meeting in December 1978.
Relations between the Committee of Ministers and the Parliamentary Assembly
The Representative of Switzerland said that he would intervene on this item to congratulate Mr Stoffelen as Rapporteur on this question and on the documents he had so far prepared (AS/Parl(30)16 and 32). He would also underline the need for rules concerning the conduct of relations between the two organs and that each organ should respect its obligations stemming from these rules. Each organ had its prerogatives and there should be no interference one with the other; for example the Assembly should not become involved in staff matters. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 18 - Item IV
The Representative of Sweden said that he would refer to the Swedish Foreign Minister's initiative at the 63rd Session of the Committee of Ministers when he had said that there was room for further improvement in the relations between the two organs and the Council of Europe, despite the progress made in recent years. The Swedish delegation had already undertaken to prepare, in co-operation with the Secretariat, a paper on this question but to avoid any duplication of work it would await the Recommendation on this subject which, he understood, would be adopted at the mini-session in Stockholm in June 1979.
The Representative of Belgium said that his delegation had reservations concerning point 4 of the draft Recommendation in AS/Parl(30)32.
The Representative of Luxembourg said that point 3 in that draft seemed superfluous.
Situation in the Mediterranean region - Exchange of views on Recommendation 853
Following a suggestion by the Representative of the United Kingdom, the Chairman said that this item would be discussed under item 8 of the agenda of the present meeting.
The Representative of Turkey said that discussion of Recommendation 853 in the Joint Committee was delicate and it would be preferable to avoid any polemics concerning the question of Cyprus. He recalled that Mr Waldheim had enjoined governments to respect the confidential nature of his efforts to restart the intercommunual talks. Consequently discussion of this matter between Permanent Representatives and Parliamentarians might give rise to an unbalanced exchange of views. On the one hand Parliamentarians would feel free to comment on any aspect of the matter and on the other Permanent Representatives would be inhibited in making their views known, in order to respect their commitments to the Secretary General of the United Nations. CONFIDENTIAL
- 19 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item V
V. SITUATION IN CYPRUS (Concl(79)300/V)
No delegation wished to make a statement under this item. CONFIDENTIAL
- 21 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item VI
VI. HUMAN RIGHTS IN URUGUAY Written question No. 217 by Mr. Boucheny (CM(79)75)
The Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany made the following statement:
"The following elements should be taken into account in any reply to the Written Question:
1. The Committee of Ministers regards arrest without warrant, arbitrary arrest and torture, wherever these occur, as serious violations of human rights and, in the case of elected parliamentarians, as an attack on the system of parliamentary democracy.
2. The Committee of Ministers, and also the member States of the Council of Europe, have made themselves responsible for the protection of human rights at national, regional and international level, by using all means deemed to be effective. These include diplomatic approaches to the governments concerned with a view to persuading them to change their attitude. Accordingly, last year the members of the European Community made joint representations to the government in Montevideo concerning violations of human rights in Uruguay. Regarding the nature of such interventions, the means to be used depend mainly on the answer to the following question: Is a particular action really likely to improve the lot of the victims of violations of human rights? In any case, it seems desirable to refer to the InterAmerican Convention on Human Rights (1969), the Human Rights Committee of the Organisation of American States and that of the United Nations, which have already considered the situation in Uruguay.
3. It should be stated in any reply that the European countries have admitted persons who have been persecuted politically and offered asylum to persons coming from Uruguay.
4. No purpose would appear to be served by discussing measures directed against Uruguay's economy in a reply to Mr Boucheny. The history of relations between Latin America and the United States shows that this type of humanitarian intervention does not produce favourable results. Therefore, if by referring to a ban on "support" for Uruguay, Mr Boucheny means breaking off trade telations, it would be better not to say anything at all about it. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 22 - Item VI
The German Government, for instance, is of the opinion that pressure in the economic field is not a suitable means with which to improve the situation of human rights in Uruguay. Regarding arms deliveries, the Federal Republic of Germany is not affected and the same is very probably true of the other member States of the Council of Europe."
The Representative of Belgium was of the opinion that the information contained in CM(79)75 could provide a sound basis for the preparation of a draft reply to Mr Boucheny. However, he proposed that this reply should contain a reference to the considerable efforts made by the member States of the Council of Europe to receive refugees from Uruguay.
The Representatives of Norway and the Netherlands thought that CM(79)75 contained enough material to permit the preparation of a draft reply.
The Representative of Italy said that his authorities attached particular importance to human rights problems in all parts of the world. In that context they had always worked to ensure that these rights were respected in Latin America with which Italy had special bonds. They had made repeated approaches to the Uruguayan Government and secured the release of a number of political prisoners, notably Italians. The Italian Government had also participated in 1977 in a joint approach by the 9 countries of the European Community to the Government in Montevideo, and it would continue in future to do all in its power to ensure that human rights were respected in Uruguay.
That said, his delegation felt that the elements of information provided by the Secretariat in CM(79)75 could be considered the basis of a draft reply to Mr Boucheny's question. Naturally this draft could also include elements arising out of the present discussion.
The Representative of the United Kingdom shared much of the Federal German Representative's opinion. His authorities spared no efforts to defend human rights throughout the world but a decision had to be made in each case on the most efficacious means. They believed that at this time the outright condemnation of the situation in Uruguay was not likely to further the cause of human rights, but rather to weaken it. Accordingly, considerable caution was necessary when drawing up the draft reply. He wondered whether in fact it was within the Committee of Ministers' competence to ban trade relations by member countries with Uruguay as requested by Mr Boucheny. CONFIDENTIAL
- 23 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item VI
The Representative of Austria was of the opinion that Mr Boucheny had put what could be described as a "suggestive question", since he obviously expected the answer to be "yes". As the British Representative had said, it was difficult for one government, let alone 21 governments, to say "yes" to that type of question. The problem was therefore how to reply. He could understand the Secretariat's caution. It had merely referred in CM(79)75 to precedents in respect of attitudes adopted by the Committee of Ministers towards the situation in non-member countries. Consideration would undoubtedly have to be given to this type of indirect reply.
The Representative of Sweden said that in Stockholm it was felt that this written question raised questions of principle and it was difficult, if not impossible, to reply to it. He hoped to be able to provide the Secretariat with more definite information before the next meeting.
The Representative of Luxembourg said that the reply to the question as it was put, at least in the French version, could, in fact, only be "no". Actually, it was not for the Committee of Ministers "to take all appropriate measures to promote in Uruguay an amnesty, restoration of human rights, protection of parliamentarians, and to ban any political or economic support for the Uruguayan Government or the delivery of arms". Such a demand went far beyond the Statute. Therefore the reply to the Assembly should be negative, but it should be couched in indirect and vague terms.
The Chairman said that the Secretariat now had adequate material to prepare a draft reply for the next meeting.
Decision
The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level) in the light of a draft reply to be prepared by the Secretariat. CONFIDENTIAL
- 25 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item VII
VII.
FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT OF THE MEMBERS OF THE PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY IN THE MEMBER STATES OF THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE Written Question No. 215 (Concl(79)300/VII, CM(78)328 and 329, CM(79)17)
The Representative of Austria said that the three Permanent Representatives instructed by the Committee to help the two parties concerned to come to an agreed text of a reply to the Written Question had held a number of meetings and that their proposals were being studied. It would be advisable to await the 303rd meeting to deal with this item in order to enable the two delegations directly concerned to receive instructions from their authorities on the matter.
Decision
The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level). CONFIDENTIAL
- 27 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item VIII
VIII. SITUATION IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AREA (General Policy of the Council of Europe) Recommendation 853 (Concl(79)300/III(a))
The Representative of Italy made the following statement:
"My authorities cannot of course fail to be gratified by the interest shown by the Assembly in a Mediterranean dimension for the Council of Europe's activity, and the impetus that the parliamentarians are anxious to give our Organisation's activities so as to establish closer links between the Organisation and all countries with a Mediterranean coastline.
My delegation is consequently entirely in favour of a positive reply on the various sections of Recommendation 853, particularly, in the case of paragraph 14(i) and (ii), the suggestions in the Hofer Report on the possibility of the Council taking action to ensure closer co-operation in fields such as the development of education, protection of the environment and in particular living resources of the sea.
A study could therefore be carried out by the Secretariat of all these problems, so that the Secretary General can make due allowance when he comes to prepare the intergovernmental programme of activities. A paper setting out concrete proposals might be drawn up by the Secretariat.
Again, my authorities are in favour of any steps to strenthen the existing links between the Council and all Mediterranean countries which are not members of the Organisation, as this would certainly make for greater stability and progress in the region. My delegation wishes in particular to stress the interest with which Yugoslavia has followed the work of the Assembly, the fact that this country has acceded to a variety of European conventions relating to education, and the case for giving the Belgrade Government a reason for taking part in other ventures of our Organisation, particularly in the legal field."
The Representative of Malta said that the Hofer Report had on the whole been well received by his authorities, although they regretted a number of omissions and inaccuracies, particularly concerning Malta. They thought that they had at least the merit of providing a point of departure for a certain "Mediterranean orientation" in the Council of Europe's activities, the absence of which they had repeatedly had the occasion to regret in the past. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 28 - Item VIII
The Representative of Greece thought that Recommendation 853 dealt with problems of vital importance for the Mediterranean countries and also for all the Council of Europe member States. He drew a distinction between three types of problems, the first being the political and strategic situation of the Mediterranean regions, where a balance was essential if world peace was to be maintained. He thought that the United Nations provided a more suitable framework for settling the disputes and conflicts that continued to beleaguer certain regions.
The second category consisted of the economic problem raised in Recommendation 853, concerning among other things the contrast between countries on the Northern shores of the Mediterranean and those of the Southern Mediterranean; this would have to be settled within the North-South dialogue. He saw the role of Europe as essentially providing a spur for the economic development of the Mediterranean regions and hence peace in those regions.
The third category related to matters referred to in the final paragraphs of the Recommendation, concerning the CSCE; he thought it was particularly important, as indicated in paragraph 14(iii)(a) that the Madrid meeting should be carefully prepared.
The Representative of Denmark said that his authorities thought that the wording of paragraph 10 of the Recommendation went too far, since the meeting in Valletta could only work out recommendations to governments. He thought that the scope of paragraph 14(i) and (iii) was both too broad and too vague. In particular he had doubts about the meaning of inviting all the riparian states in the Mediterranean to "associate themselves" with Council of Europe activities.
The Representative of France felt that the action of the Council of Europe on these problems should make due allowance for the specific nature of the Organisation.
The Representative of Portugal agreed that it was important not to lose sight of the Organisation's possibilities. He suggested that special attention should be paid to paragraph 14(i), dealing with the inclusion in the Council of Europe's Intergovernmental Work Programme of a specific field which conferred a genuine Mediterranean dimension upon its activities. It was necessary to remember, while doing so, that there were already certain fields in the Work Programme devoted to this kind of problem. Although it was legitimate to regard them as mainly technical, the importance of dealing satisfactorily with problems that were specific to the Mediterranean region should be emphasised. One idea might be to set up a Deputies' working party responsible for deciding which activities were to be included in a specific field. CONFIDENTIAL
- 29 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item VIII
The Representative of the Netherlands said that his authorities too had welcomed the Assembly Recommendation, although they were hesitant about conferring a regional dimension on the Council of Europe activities, as proposed in paragraphs 14(i) and (ii), and wondered whether the Council of Europe was a suitable forum for this kind of exercise.
Referring to paragraph 14(iii) he said that the Netherlands authorities were ready to lend their full co-operation so as to ensure that the Madrid meeting was properly prepared.
The Representative of Switzerland thought that Assembly Recommendation 853 was of major importance. It had to be seen in conjunction with Resolution 100 of the Conference of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe, examined at the 300th meeting, which was concerned with relations between the Northern and Southern countries of Europe, and with other Assembly texts of a simliar nature which were currently being prepared. Recommendation 853 was concerned with problems of definite political importance, which should without question be discussed at ministerial level. May appeared rather too soon, but it was perfectly conceivable that a discussion of this kind could be held at the autumn session of the Committee of Ministers. The Recommendation might also be discussed at the Colloquy.
He recalled in connection with the idea of conferring a "Mediterranean" dimension on the Intergovernmental Work Programme that the present Plan already contained activities relevant to this kind of question. The next Medium-Term Plan would be the responsibility of the new Secretary General, who would certainly bear in mind the Assembly's suggestions. His authorities were fully aware when it came to the implementation of the Mediterranean chapter of the Helsinki Final Act, of the need for careful preparations for the meeting in Madrid.
The Representative of Norway agreed with the Representative of the Netherlands that it would be rather unfortunate, in connection with paragraph 14(i) to select from the Council of Europe's activities some which were of special relevance for the Mediterranean countries, and others of special relevance for the North of Europe. The expression "Mediterranean dimension" may indicate a commitment by the Council of Europe to proceed with a superior objective for this geographical area. It would be more useful for groups of countries which felt certain needs because of attachment to geographical and social areas, to seek to solve their problems in a dialogue in which all groups of member countries participated. Such a North-South dialogue in Europe may be of significance and importance as far as Norway was concerned. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 30 - Item VIII
Referring to paragraph 14(ii) he said that the appeal for co-operation with all Mediterranean countries seemed rather unrealistic for a body which was so clearly defined regionally as the Council of Europe. The existing machinery for non-member states to participate as observers in Council of Europe conferences and meetings seemed to function in a satisfactory manner.
The Representative of Turkey said that his authorities had welcomed the Hofer Report, but had some reservations. He wanted to make a special reference to the way in which Assembly rapporteurs worked; they often based their reports on newspaper articles instead of carrying out their own investigations in the field. Some of the analyses offered by Mr Hofer in his report went too far, were inaccurate or excessively general. He could not, for instance, agree with what he said about the awakening of Islam. Paragraph 11 in the preamble was also liable to be misinterpreted, since what was meant was the Lebanon and not other countries.
The Representative of Spain said he was glad that the Assembly had turned its attention to the question of the Mediterranean and the part to be played by the Council of Europe. He recalled what the President of his government had said to the Assembly, indicating that Spain did not conceive of a European policy without a Mediterranean dimension. Even if his authorities did not subscribe to all the analyses in Recommendation 853, where excessive emphasis was placed on the Eastern Mediterranean at the expense of the Western Mediterranean, they regarded the Recommendation as providing a good foundation for a broader political debate.
The Representative of Austria said that he had been particularly glad to hear the reactions of the representatives of the Mediterranean countries. The Council of Europe's centre of gravity had shifted slightly in the course of the past few years, following the entry of Mediterranean countries into the Council of Europe, and the Council's activities must reflect this change. The Assembly Recommendation was certainly only the first in a series of Assembly texts to be devoted to the problems of the Mediterranean, and more broadly speaking to the North-South dialogue.
In connection with paragraph 14(iii) he stated that the encouragement concerning preparations for the meeting in Valletta had come too late, but he gave an assurance that his authorities would make every effort to ensure that the preparations for the Madrid meeting were efficient. CONFIDENTIAL
- 31 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item VIII
As far as paragraph 14(i) was concerned he wondered what was meant by "including in its Intergovernmental Work Programme a specific field conferring a genuine 'Mediterranean dimension' upon Council of Europe activities"? It would perhaps be advisable to ask the Secretariat to prepare a document indicating what parts of the Medium-Term Plan were already concerned with the Mediterranean regions. This would make it possible to see whether further fields ought to be added.
He thought that the proposal in paragraph 14(ii) was a political one of great delicacy, and agreed with the Representative of Switzerland that this proposal could usefully be considered by the Ministers.
The Representative of the United Kingdom expressed agreement with the suggestion of the Representative of Switzerland that the question of North-South relations might be a suitable subject for discussion at ministerial level, perhaps at the 65th Session in November 1979.
The Chairman said that the Assembly's venture in concerning itself with the situation in the Mediterranean had been on the whole very well received. It had been stressed that the Council of Europe's action in this area should allow for the specific nature of the Organisation and that no attempt should be made to extend it so as to take in aspects coming within the purview of other international organisations. It had been suggested that the more particularly Mediterranean activities at present appearing in the Work Programme and the fields of activities that could be included should be looked up, with a view to examining whether a specific objective ought to be included in the second Medium- Term Plan.
Decision
The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level). CONFIDENTIAL
- 33 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item IX
IX. JUDGEMENT OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE CASE LUEDICKE, BELACEM AND KOC Application of Article 54 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Concl(79)298/XVI, Letter HD/C47 of 4.12.78)
The Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany said that the European Court of Human Rights had decided to postpone until 28 May the execution of the measures which should be taken for the application of Article 50 of the Convention. It may be that the judgment of the Court, in accordance with Article 50 of the Convention, would not be necessary. He informed the Deputies that Mr. Luedicke's claims had already been satisfied but that it was not yet known what sum was to be given to Mr. Belkacem and Mr. Koç. The Ministry of Justice was preparing a modification to the legislation concerning interpretation costs. Until the entry into force of this new legislation, tribunals were asked not to deliver decisions on interpretation costs. Legislation already existed providing for non-imposition of interpretation costs before labour courts.
The Director of Human Rights said that in the light of the provisional but very satisfactory information furnished by the Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany it would be advisable to postpone consideration of this item until the Deputies' 306th meeting in June 1979.
Decision
The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 306th meeting (June 1979 - A level). CONFIDENTIAL
- 35 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item X
X. ARTHUR HILTON AGAINST THE UNITED KINGDOM Decision to be taken under Article 32 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Concl(79)300/IX, Letter HD/C27 of 26 June 1978)
The Chairman recalled that at their 300th meeting (item IX) the Deputies had agreed to consider at the present meeting a draft Resolution on this case; the text was appended to Notes No. 2859.
The Representative of Ireland, referring to the paragraph in the draft Resolution which summarised the information furnished by the Government of the United Kingdom, said that the last sentence concerning the question of reparation might be drafted in a more simple manner.
The Director of Human Rights, in the light of this suggestion, proposed that the last sentence of the summary of the information furnished by the Government of the United Kingdom might read as follows: "... and that reparation had been offered by the United Kingdom to the applicant and rejected by him".
Decision
The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level). CONFIDENTIAL
- 37 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XI
XI. DRAFT STATEMENT ON RACE AND RACIAL PREJUDICE OF UNESCO Written Question No. 211 by Mr Portheine (Concl(79)300/X, CM(78)227, 335, 339, CM(79)47 and Add and CM(79)84)
The Chairman recalled that the Committee had already examined the draft reply to the Written Question by Mr Portheine on a number of occasions. The latest draft reply appeared in CM(79)84, but first the Deputies should consider the amendments presented by the Norwegian delegation (CM(79)47).
A vote on the first Norwegian amendment, proposing that the following sentence be added at the end of paragraph 2 of the draft reply: "The Committee of Ministers expresses its satisfaction that the Declaration contains no reference to the UN Resolution (30/3379) equating Zionism with racism", produced the following result: 8 in favour, 2 against and 9 abstentions. It was not adopted.
The vote on the second Norwegian amendment (CM(79)47, paragraph 3) produced the following result: 7 in favour, 4 against and 7 abstentions. It was rejected.
The Deputies then examined the draft reply prepared by the Secretariat (CM(79)84).
Regarding the first paragraph, the Representative of the United Kingdom said that he was not very happy about the addition of the passage underlined which did not fully reflect his authorities' views. The latter had made reservations in connection with the Declaration which were he believed, shared by other delegations of Council of Europe member States.
The Director of Human Rights explained that this passage had been added to take into account the essence of the second Norwegian amendment (CM(79)47, paragraph 3) which seemed to go too far by speaking of the Declaration as a normative instrument. He recalled that the Decade to combat racism and racial discrimination had encountered difficulties when attempts had been made to implement concrete initiatives in the UN, so that the UNESCO Declaration was, in fact, the only positive contribution in this field. Accordingly, it would not be superfluous to mention it.
The Representative of Norway could accept the inclusion of this passage in the text of the reply.
The Representative of Belgium also said he could agree to it, despite his authorities' reservations about the text of the Declaration.
An indicative vote on this first paragraph produced the following result: 14 in favour, none against and 2 abstentions. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 38 - Item XI
Regarding the second paragraph of the draft reply, the Representative of Belgium proposed that the words "in its entirety", which had appeared in the first version instead of "necessarily", be inserted in the passage: "which does not necessarily reflect the views of the Council of Europe member States". It would then read as follows: "a compromise which does not necessarily reflect in its entirety the views of the Council of Europe member States".
The Representative of Italy said he could agree to the Belgian proposal, although he thought the original version was preferable.
The Representative of Norway said that her authorities, who had adopted the text of the Declaration in the context of an international organisation, could not express a conflicting opinion on the occasion of a parliamentary question in another international organisation. She thought that the original version was unacceptable and therefore accepted ad referendum the version proposed by the Belgian delegation.
The second paragraph, worded in accordance with the Belgian proposal, was put to an indicative vote and adopted unanimously.
Decision
The Deputies adopted the following reply to Written Question No. 211:
"1. A preliminary draft declaration on Race and Racial Prejudice drawn up by the Director General of UNESCO was examined in detail by the member States of UNESCO at the beginning of 1978. This draft was extensively amended during discussions and negotiations at a meeting of governmental representatives held from 13-20 March 1978. The draft declaration thus prepared which is an important contribution to the Decade for action to combat racism and racial discrimination, was adopted by consensus at the 20th Session of the General Conference of UNESCO on 27 November 1978.
2. With regard to point (a) of Mr Portheine's question, the Committee of Ministers points out that this Declaration, which is not mandatory in character, is the outcome of a compromise which does not necessarily reflect in its entirety the views of the Council of Europe member States. CONFIDENTIAL
- 39 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XI
3. Concerning point (b) of Mr Portheine's question, relating to the legal significance of the reference to the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid contained in paragraph 8 of the Preamble of the Declaration, it should be noted that during the discussions within UNESCO, a number of delegations of Council of Europe member States stated that the reference to the International Convention on the Suppression and punishment of the Crime of Apartheid did not imply that their attitude to the convention was modified. In this connection it should be stated that the introductory word "noting" is merely a reminder of the existence of the said convention and does not imply any obligation on those States which have not ratified this instrument.
4. In reply to point (c) of Mr Portheine's question, it is to be stressed that distinctions made in national legislation between citizens and non-citizens are, of themselves, not covered by Article 3 unless such distinctions are motivated by racist considerations.
5. With regard to point (d) of Mr Portheine's question, it should be noted that the responsibility referred to in Article 9 of the Declaration was rather moral since international responsibility could only exist in regard to an obligation derived from a treaty, from international custom or from a general principle of international law. This leaves the matter open as to whether the Declaration, which as such cannot be constitutive of a general principle, reflects in its essential part - racial discrimination practised by a State - such a general principle of international law. In any case the reference to international responsibility in this Declaration is without prejudice to consideration of the matter in other fora."
The Representatives of Austria, Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany, Iceland, Norway, Turkey, Sweden and the United Kingdom approved the above decision ad referendum. CONFIDENTIAL
- 41 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XII
XII. THE HAGUE ACADEMY OF INTERNATIONAL LAW (Concl(78)297/XXVI(b), CM(79)58)
The Representative of the Netherlands thanked the Secretariat for preparing the information paper ( CM(79)58) . He recalled that at the 297th meeting (item XXVI(b)), he had drawn the Committee's attention to the financial situation of The Hague Academy and expressed the hope that concrete measures could be taken. Actually, the situation had become increasingly critical in recent years.
The Representative of Norway said that her authorities had taken an initiative to double Norway's annual contribution with the possibility of implementation already from 1980.
The Representative of Switzerland said that his country was among those providing regular financial aid to the Academy and pointed out that this Institution's activities were completely in line with the spirit of the Council of Europe. He proposed that the Council should decide to grant regular financial support to the Academy. That support could perhaps amount to FF 100,000 per annum for a period of between 3 and 5 years.
The Representative of Cyprus supported the Swiss Representative's proposal that the Council should grant financial aid. He also said that he would urge his authorities, who contributed to the Academy's receipts on an ad hoc basis, to pursue their efforts.
The Representative of Austria announced that his Government had decided to grant financial aid amounting to $7,500 per annum.
The Representative of Luxembourg stated that his country's contribution in 1978 had been 50% higher than in the previous year and the 1979 contribution was four times greater than that for 1977. He also supported the proposal for aid from the Council of Europe.
The Representative of Turkey pointed out that his country's legislation did not permit such contributions of a voluntary nature unless they appeared in the Council of Europe's budget.
The Representative of France emphasised the financial effort made by his country on behalf of the Academy.
The Representative of the United Kingdom said that his authorities were closely studying the possibility of making a contribution. He asked the Secretariat to state whether the Swiss proposal could be put into practice this year without a supplementary appropriation. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 42 - Item XII
The Representative of Belgium was not yet able to give a reply concerning a contribution from his country because three ministerial departments had to be involved in a decision of that nature. He added that an institution similar to The Hague Academy also existed in Belgium: the College at Bruges, which catered for advanced studies, and that his Government financed it to the tune of 25 million Belgian francs per annum.
The Representative of Spain said that his country contributed on an ad hoc basis. No decision had been taken for the current year, and his delegation was giving sympathetic consideration to the Swiss proposal.
The Representative of Italy said that his authorities were in principle ready to respond favourably to the appeal launched by the Netherlands delegation for regular contributions to the Academy of International Law. For legal reasons the Italian authorities also felt that such contributions should be determined in conjunction with the grants to be given by the Council of Europe to all the institutions involved with similar matters.
He wondered whether it might be possible for the managing bodies of the Academy to make requests direct to the governments and to the major foundations of the various countries.
On behalf of the Secretary General, the Director of Political Affairs expressed the former's great admiration for the Academy and asked whether a solution might not be found by consulting the CDCJ.
The Director of Human Rights suggested that the Committee might address a Recommendation to the member States, inviting the Governments to offer financial support to the Academy's activities. The Committee might also decide upon a material contribution by the Council to the Academy, in so far as that was possible. In view of the fact that the Academy's programme for the present year contained a chapter on humanitarian law, the Council's contribution for 1979 could come out of Sub-head 31 of the budget, which might perhaps be increased by means of transfers at the end of the year.
The Director of Political Affairs suggested that in order to make it easier for the Secretary General to prepare the draft budget for the financial year 1980, the Deputies should, even at that stage, give some guidance concerning the inclusion of an appropriation for the Academy and, if appropriate, the amount.
The Representative of Belgium proposed that a decision in principle be taken on the matter without specifying the amount. CONFIDENTIAL
- 43 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XII
The Representative of Austria said that a decision about the budget for the coming year seemed premature at that stage, and he favoured the idea that the CDDH should take the needs of The Hague Academy into account as far as possible when apportioning the appropriations available under Sub-head 31 for 1979.
The Representatives of France and Sweden were also in favour of waiting before formally deciding upon a budgetary contribution.
The Representative of Switzerland distinguished between the following three courses of action: first, Sub-head 31 of the current budget; second, possible budgetary transfers at the end of the year, and third, an undertaking by the Secretariat to make proposals on the matter in the context of the budget for the years ahead. It would not be necessary to vote on the subject for the time being.
The Director of Human Rights was also of the opinion that a budgetary decision was not necessary at that stage, but he noted that the delegations had, in general, reacted very favourably to the idea of a regular Council of Europe contribution to the Academy. He did not think that this contribution, which would in any case be very modest, would affect the efforts by each individual State to make a regular contribution towards the Academy's general operational expenditure. The Secretariat could prepare a more detailed document for the meeting in May.
The Representative of the Netherlands thanked the various delegations for the sympathy they had displayed and the support they had given to the Academy, both at national level and in the Council of Europe. He emphasised that it was not so much the amount of the contributions, but rather their regular nature which was essential to ensure the efficient operation of this Institution.
Decision
The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 304th meeting (May 1979 - A level). CONFIDENTIAL
- 45 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XIII
XIII. RESOLUTIONS OF THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS (Concl(79)300/XI, CM(78)278, CM(79)42 and 71)
The Representative of Sweden indicated his agreement with the draft terms of reference for the steering committees. As to the action taken on Recommendations, he was not in favour of introducing a general system of reports, which would be out of all proportion to the end in mind; he would prefer the second solution proposed in paragraph 17 of CM(78)278, which should be implemented with the utmost selectivity. Lastly, he said he could accept the proposal to withdraw the confidential classification from the compendia of Resolutions, taking care that confidential Resolutions or parts of Resolutions were not included in the compendia, but without going to the opposite extreme of giving a confidential classification to Resolutions which were not confidential.
The Representative of Norway said that her authorities had examined CM(78)278 and had no particular comments on the question of amending the rules of the titles and numbering of Resolutions adopted by the Committee of Ministers. They were, however, hesitant with regard to a system for examining the action taken by governments on recommendations of the Committee of Ministers.
An extensive examination system, like the one proposed, would be out of proportion compared to its practical value. The Norwegian authorities believed that if need arose the matter would probably be raised by the steering committees concerned, which would then made suggestions to the Committee of Ministers.
The Representative of Austria said that he would not object to an evaluation of the proposals set out in Part V of CM(78)278 being made by the Steering Committees if a majority of delegations were in favour of introducing a system of reports on action taken on Recommendations of the Committee of Ministers. He nonetheless stressed that such a system should be introduced with caution since it would involve a fairly heavy burden of additional work.
The Representative of Spain said he was grateful to the Swiss delegation for the considerable efforts it was making together with the Secretariat in order to accomplish this task satisfactorily. He shared the view of other delegations with regard to the selectivity with which steering committees should make their choice of Recommendations to be reported on and noted that there were several stages to the work, leading finally to a decision by the Committee of Ministers. He agreed to the proposed procedure.
The Deputy Director of Legal Affairs reminded the Deputies of what he had said at their 296th meeting (item XXXII (c)) and pointed out that the Secretariat's proposals for a new system for studying CM/Del/Concl(79)302 -CONFIDENTIAL 46 - Item XIII
the action taken on Recommendations were designed precisely to simplify the current system, which was paralysed by the excessive amount of information requested from governments. He said that the comments made by various delegations concerning the selectivity with which the new system should be operated would be taken into account by the steering committees when deciding in favour of one or the other systems proposed in paragraph 17 of CM(78)278.
Decisions
The Deputies i. instructed the Secretariat to take stock of Committee of Ministers' Resolutions to member States adopted since 1949 and to draw up a list of those which, in its view, are still of value and of those which have become obsolete or of no practical value or of minor interest; ii. adopted Decision No. CM/126/300379 assigning ad hoc terms of reference to all steering committees and to the CAHRS, CAHED, CAHPC, CAHID, CAHMM and CAHAR, as it appears at Appendix III to these Conclusions; iii. declassified the compendia of Committee of Ministers' Resolutions which have been produced so far and decided that future compendia of Resolutions shall not be classified as "confidential" on the understanding that they shall not contain any Resolutions of a confidential nature. - 47 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XIV
XIV. COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS ON VIOLENCE IN PRESENT-DAY SOCIETY (PC-R-VS) Observer status of the Commission of the European Communities (Concl(79)300/XIII, CM(79)6)
At the request of the Representative of Belgium, the Deputy Director of Legal Affairs said that as far as he knew there had been no change of attitude on the part of the Commission of the European Communities since the letter it had sent to the Secretary General on 28 June 1978. He emphasised how useful it would be if an observer from the Commission attended meetings of the select committee, in view of the fact that none of the experts on that committee specialised in the problems of insurance.
The Chairman announced that one delegation had asked that the vote on this item be taken by secret ballot. The result of the vote was as follows: total number of votes: 19; in favour: 14; against: 5.
Decision
The Deputies adopted Decision No. CM/125/290379 concerning the admission of the Commission of the European Communities to the Select Committee of Experts on violence in present-day society (PC-R-VS) in an observer capacity, as it appears at Appendix IV to these Conclusions. CONFIDENTIAL
- 49 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XV
XV. COMMITTEE ON THE MASS MEDIA (CAHMM) Report of the 4th meeting (Strasbourg, 11-15 December 1978) (Concl(79)300/XV, CM(79)13, 34 and Add. I-V and 44)
At the Chairman' s suggestion, the Deputies considered the different points referred to them for a decision.
The Chairman said that the Deputies had decided at their 300th meeting (item XV) to declassify the reports on the role of the State with regard to the media (Addendum I to CM(79)34) and on international aspects of the free circulation of information (Addendum II to CM(79)34). The Deputies decided to refer the two reports to governments and took note of the reports on State information practice (Addendum III), on structures and machinery for orientation, decision-making and control of broadcasting institutions (Addendum IV) and cable distribution of radio and television broadcasts (Addendum V).
The Representative of Switzerland suggested, in connection with the draft reply to Assembly Recommendations 815 and 822 set out under "Action" (paragraph (iii)) in Notes No. 2803, amending the last sentence in the second paragraph, which he thought should not contain the words "may present omissions in this respect", since they might be interpreted as an invitation to revise the European Code of Social Security and the Social Charter.
The Representative of Austria thought that the Council of Europe should not concern itself with copyright questions, which other bodies were dealing with; he said he would abstain ad referendum when the reply to the Assembly came to be voted on.
The Representative of the United Kingdom said that she too would abstain ad referendum from the vote on this matter.
The Deputy Director of Legal Affairs, replying to the Representative of Austria, said that the Committee concerned shared his anxiety to avoid any duplication, but had found that it was impossible to reach a valid agreement at world level on the questions it had provisionally decided should be included in its own programme, and had taken into account the specific problems they presented at European level. CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 50 - Item XV
He went on to report as follows on the discussion between the Committee of Experts on the functions and the role of the media (MM-FR) and Mr MacBride, Chairman of the International Commission for the study of communication problems, set up within UNESCO, which had taken place on 28 February:
"In accordance with the information which had been given following the last meeting of the Committee on the Mass Media in December 1978 to the Committee of Ministers meeting at Deputy level, the Committee of Experts on the functions and the role of the media, at its meeting from 26 February to 2 March 1979, held an exchange of views on the work of UNESCO in the media field, particularly on the interim report prepared by the UNESCO Commission on the study of communication problems, working under the Chairmanship of Mr MacBride.
It might be useful to set out briefly the context of this exercise.
You will remember that last autumn UNESCO adopted after prolonged and intense discussion a declaration on the mass media. Due to a persuasive and determined strategy the Western nations managed to turn a text which as presented at the 1976 General Conference in Nairobi would have presented a radical departure from accepted international practice in the field of media into a text which could reach common agreement. This did not mean that those who presented the original text and who did not share our attachment to freedom of information have disarmed.
In a few years time the Paris declaration would probably have been forgotten, but if it is remembered it will be less because of the text agreed to, than because of the ideological battle which preceded it.
This battle is still being waged and the MacBride report is to be seen in this light. It has become the new rallying point for those who strive for a "new information order" with all that this implies of restrictions, control and censorship. CONFIDENTIAL
- 51 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XV
This work of the Council of Europe Committee of Experts was carried out in three stages. First, the members of the Committee discussed among themselves opinions and points of view on the interim report, examining this text chapter by chapter. The main preoccupation expressed was that in a great many respects this document inaccurately described the factual situation and the legal implications of the media both in member States of the Council of Europe and at a world-wide level. Indeed, the members of the Committee who spoke on the subject expressed the feeling that the interim report was very biased in its approach and in its suggestions for action at an international level.
At a second stage, the experts took the opportunity to hear the members of national UNESCO Commissions present in Strasbourg for a meeting held at the invitation of the Secretary General. The following national UNESCO Commissions were represented at this hearing: France, Federal Republic of Germany, Spain, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. The hearing was considered very helpful by the members of the Committee because it gave them some valuable indications as to the follow-up which might be given to the work of the MacBride Commission within the framework of UNESCO.
Finally, the members of the Committee of Experts met Mr MacBride who had accepted the invitation addressed to him to come personally to Strasbourg with a view to meeting the members of the Committee. This meeting took place on Wednesday, 28 February. Mr MacBride was told beforehand that the purpose of the meeting was to give the members of the Committee of Experts an opportunity to give him, in his capacity as Chairman of the UNESCO Commission, the personal views of those participating in the discussion concerning the content of the interim report. The main ideas expressed by the members of the Committee of Experts 1) focussed on the serious preoccupation caused by the fact that the interim report inadequately reflected the main principles underlying the mass media in Western democratic countries, in particular the profound attachment of these countries to the principle of freedom of expression and the free flow of information. 2) Furthermore, it was stated that it was not the task for governments to induce the media to radically transform society as seemed to be suggested by the report. 3) Finally, emphasis was put on the fact that these countries could not be accused of not being ready to do their best with a view to helping developing countries in creating the technical and personal infrastructure necessary for a full participation in the flow of information on a world-wide level. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 52 - Item XV
Mr MacBride did not react positively to the observations presented by the members of the Committee. He rather replied in suggesting that the experts were not able to see the real problems facing them both in Europe and at the universal level. He insisted on the need for governments in Europe and for an international organisation like the Council of Europe to take the initiative in creating new bodies and instruments for the protection of the media and the professionals within the media against interference by economic and political forces and even state interference. Some members of the Committee replied that it seemed not to be up to governments to create such new bodies as this might be the beginning of state control of the media.
The day before they met Mr MacBride, the members of the Committee of Experts had been informed by the Directorate of Press and Information Services of the wish of some journalists working in Strasbourg to meet Mr MacBride at a press conference. The Committee of Experts held the view that it could not oppose such a press conference as Mr MacBride wished to give it. After discussion the Committee, however, agreed, not without some hesitations expressed by some of its members, that its Chairman and its Secretary could participate in this press conference with a view to replying to questions which might be put as regards the work of the Committee on the Mass Media itself.
During the press conference, Mr MacBride expressly stated that he was rather disappointed with the meeting he had just held with the members of the Committee of Experts whom he considered to be rather narrow-minded, preoccupied only with specifically European problems and lacking sufficient outlook on the real problems facing social communication at world-wide level.
The Secretariat had the impression that this was indeed the definite feeling with which Mr MacBride left Strasbourg and that he would not hide this during the on-going work of his Commission. On the other hand, the Secretariat believes that the whole exercise did not fail its purpose, which was to give Mr MacBride a picture as clear as possible of the preoccupation caused by the present orientation of the UNESCO Commission's work. It should be remembered that the interim report was sent to a vast number of persons, institutions and organisations in the whole world for comments. One should have no illusion of the results of this enquiry, but at least it cannot CONFIDENTIAL
- 53 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XV
be said that we in the Western world constituted the "silent minority". Indeed, it will not be possible in future for the interested circles in UNESCO to say that criticisms have never been expressed and suggestions never been made with a view to more appropriate orientation of the Commission's work.
It should also be mentioned that during the meeting with Mr MacBride the Committee handed over to Mr MacBride the two reports already prepared by the Committee on the Mass Media and which had just been declassified by the decision of your Committee, ie the report on the role of the State vis-à-vis the media and the report of the inter- national aspects of the free flow of information.
With a view to giving the members of this Committee the fullest information possible on the way the Committee of Experts on the functions and the role of the media handled this matter, the Secretariat has been instructed by the Committee of Experts to prepare a summary of all that had been said during the exchange of views within the Committee of Experts, during the meeting with Mr MacBride and during the press conference, and to submit this summary to the Chairman of your Committee. We hope that this will be available in a short time.
In conclusion, I would say that this exercise was a useful one and even a necessary one, if the Council of Europe wishes to play fully its role in safeguarding human rights and fundamental freedoms."
The Representative of Sweden said that the Swedish National Commission had not received an invitation and that so far as he knew the same was the case for some other delegations. He asked on what basis the Commissions that had been invited had been selected, since according to the preliminary information given all the National Commissions should have been invited.
The Chairman said there were three separate points to be considered: the contents of the report, whether the Committee of Experts had devoted too much time to the matter, and lastly the question of invitations to national committees for UNESCO, raised by the Representative of Sweden.
The Deputy Director of Political Affairs made a preliminary reply to this question, on the understanding that the matter would be discussed further at the next meeting. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 54 - Item XV
The Representative of Norway asked when a written report on the 26 February - 2 March meeting of the CAHMM would be submitted to delegations and when the question would appear on the agenda, and remarked that her authorities would then have comments to make.
The Representative of Switzerland said that the report by the Deputy Director of Legal Affairs was very well presented. He would like to have information about Mr MacBride's press conference, attended by the Chairman of the Committee of Experts, and its repercussions in the press. The Secretariat could draw up a written report, together with press cuttings, on the matter.
The Deputy Director of Legal Affairs said that the Committee of Experts had asked the Secretariat to provide the Chairman of the Deputies with a full account of the discussions and exchanges of views on the MacBride Commission's interim report, and that this would be done in the course of April. Nothing had appeared in the press as a result of Mr MacBride's press conference.
Decisions
The Deputies i. agreed to transmit to their governments the reports on: a. the role of the State with regard to the media (Add. I to CM(79)34); b. international aspects of the free circulation of information (Add. II to CM(79)34); ii. took note of the reports on: a. State information practice (Add. III to CM(79)34); b. structures and machinery for orientation, decision-making and control of broadcasting institutions (Add. IV to CM(79)34); c. cable distribution of radio and television broadcasts (Add. V to CM(79)34); iii. noted that CAHMM had executed the ad hoc terms of reference assigned to it under Decision No. CM/55/020378; CONFIDENTIAL
- 55 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XV
iv. adopted the following reply to Recommendation 815 on freedom of expression and the role of the writer in Europe, and Recommendation 822 on payment to creators for library loans (public lending rights):
"As stated in Doc. 4142, the Committee of Ministers transmitted Recommendation 815 for an opinion to the Steering Committee for Social Affairs (CDAS) and to the Committee on the Mass Media (CAHMM).
According to the opinion given by the CDAS, most social problems raised by the Assembly are not peculiar to writers but common to many categories of intellectual workers. Such workers may need special protection if, owing to the specific nature of their work, they do not belong to groups of persons covered by standards generally applicable and laid down in national legislation. In this context account must be taken of the fact that international instruments such as the European Code of Social Security, have a scope ratione personae which is expressed in percentage terms, or as the Social Charter, have provisions which can be fulfilled if a given proportion of the population benefits from them.
Being informed that the Assembly is preparing currently a recommendation on the social protection of intellectual workers in general, the Committee deems it advisable to await this text before studying in greater detail the situation in Europe and making, if need be, proposals on ways and means of strengthening the social protection of this category of person.
With regard to paragraph 11(i) of Recommendation 815, CAHMM, for its part, sought more precise details, in the report accompanying the Recommendation, regarding the aspects falling within its competence in respect of which the Assembly desires intergovernmental action at European level. It found in it, inter alia, proposals concerning library dues, which form also the subject of Recommendation 822, and the protection of authors' rights with regard to reprography. In answer to Recommendation 815, it was decided to place the following question on the agenda for a meeting to be held in 1980 in the CAHMM framework: 'Possible action to be taken in answer to Recommendation 815 of the Assembly on reprography'. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 56 - Item XV
Asked also to give an opinion on Recommendation 822 on payment to creators for library loans (public lending right), the competent CAHMM committee of experts decided further to place the following question on its agenda for its meeting in 1980: 'Possible action to be taken in answer to Recommendation 822 of the Assembly on payment to creators for library loans (public lending right)'.
It will be remembered moreover, that pursuant to its specific terms of reference, the competent CAHMM committee of experts proposes to pursue its most important and urgent task, which is that of seeking and adopting common solutions acceptable to Council of Europe member States with regard to the problems posed by cable distribution of television broadcasts and the question of the protection of rights it involves, on behalf not only of broadcasters but also the holders of copyright and neighbouring rights other than those of the broadcasters."; v. taking into account decisions (i) to (iv) above and decisions adopted at their 300th meeting (item XV), took note of the report of the CAHMM as a whole (CM(79)34).
During the vote on decision (iv) above, the Representatives of Austria and the United Kingdom abstained ad referendum. CONFIDENTIAL
- 57 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XVI
XVI. AD HOC CONFERENCE OF EUROPEAN MINISTERS RESPONSIBLE FOR PUBLIC SECURITY (Concl(78)300/XVI, CM(79)18)
On a proposal from the Representative of Greece, supported by the Representatives of the United Kingdom and Switzerland, this item was dealt with in conjunction with item XVII, which is connected with the proposal to convene a conference of Ministers responsible for public security.
Decision
The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level). CONFIDENTIAL
- 59 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XVII
XVII. TERRORISM IN EUROPE Recommendation 852 and Order No 376 (Concl(79)300/III(a))
The Representative of Denmark said that questions related to the prosecution of terrorists were being considered by a Committee of Experts set up by the CDPC to examine the problems raised by certain new forms of concerted acts of violence. His authorities felt there would be no need for further committees to deal with the question of the suppression of terrorism.
On the other hand, the Representative of Denmark said that in the opinion of his authorities, there was no need for further discussions within the framework of the Council of Europe of the questions mentioned in CM(79)18 dealing with the possibility of convening a Conference of Ministers responsible for Public Security. His authorities, consequently, had not considered in detail the proposals contained in the document. He did, however, mention that Denmark was against establishing a European central index of terrorism and was also opposed to the setting up of inter-state groups of police specialising in the surveillance of terrorists.
The Representative of France said that, generally speaking, the French authorities feared that if the Council of Europe acted on this Recommendation it would be departing from its proper path and taking on what was essentially a police function; moreover it would interfere ineffectually in work already being done in other more appropriate quarters. His authorities had the following comments to make on the various paragraphs of Recommendation 852:
- Para 13
This paragraph seemed to suggest that the Council of Europe had a monopoly in the fight against terrorism, which was factually inaccurate and would be no part of the Council of Europe's job.
- Para 15 i. The French authorities were in favour of exchanges of views and of improving the exchange of information, but they did not favour co-ordination which would take the Council of Europe outside its field of competence. ii. The French authorities were in favour of applying the Vienna Convention. But it should not be applied so strictly that it led to excessive distrust of diplomatic missions. iii.Steps to this end had already been taken. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 60 - Item XXII
vi, vii and viii
Co-operation in criminal matters was sufficiently well organised under existing Conventions and through the work of relevant committees of experts. As regards co-operation in police matters, many member States found that Interpol served the purpose efficiently.
France expressed reservations on these points but did not of course rule out Council of Europe action on practical matters such as those envisaged in the Committee of Ministers' Declaration on Terrorism. x
For the reasons set out by the French delegation on several occasions elsewhere, the plan for a conference of Ministers responsible for Public Security was premature and not even advisable. Such an idea would in any case require a. great deal of thought and detailed preparation, even if it were deemed useful in this context. It should be clear, however, that the failure of a meeting of this kind would be a most regrettable blunder.
The United Kingdom Representative stated that his government's position was similar to that outlined by the Representative of France. They considered that the Council of Europe had an important part to play in the struggle against terrorism in such ways as through the European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism. But while the Council had a useful role to play in the judicial field, his government had doubts on the proposal that it should get further involved in the field of police co-operation. The 21 member States had very varied police practices and traditions. The United Kingdom believed that practical police co-operation against terrorism was best organised on a bilateral basis or in small groups. Centralised machinery covering 21 states was bound to be cumbersome and might slow down useful exchanges. They were therefore doubtful about the Assembly's recommendations v, ix and x and perhaps vi, while the Assembly's own Rapporteur had indicated that viii was premature. His government also considered that these police operational aspects were not covered by the PC- AV's present terms of reference. On the other hand, they supported Assembly recommendations iii, iv and vii and were ready to take part in the exchange of views envisaged in i. CONFIDENTIAL
- 61 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XVII
The Representative of Ireland said that, although he appreciated the good intentions which had apparently inspired the Assembly in making this diffuse Recommendation, his authorities would have reservations about participating in the action recommended in certain paragraphs, particularly paragraphs (v), (vii) and (x) as well as other paragraphs based apparently on unfounded or gratuitous assumptions. The independence of the judiciary was of primary importance in his country and he found it difficult to envisage how the judiciary could properly be "encouraged" to take the recommended action. In connection with paragraph (vii), he asked the Deputy Director of Legal Affairs to indicate whether reservations had been made by any of the parties to the Convention. He expressed doubts about the recommendation that the Council should now embark on a new role in police matters. His authorities shared the reservations expressed by other delegations regarding the proposed conference and he felt that duplication in this sector should be avoided.
In reply to the Representative of Ireland, the Deputy Director of Legal Affairs said that Article 13 of the Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism gave states the possibility of declaring that they reserved the right to refuse extradition in respect of any offence mentioned in Article 1 which they considered to be a political offence, provided that they undertook to take into due consideration, when assessing the nature of the offence, any particularly serious aspects of it. Thus three of the six states which had ratified the Convention (Cyprus, Denmark and Sweden) had made a reservation on the strength of Article 13. Italy, Norway and Portugal had done so when signing the Convention. On that occasion Italy and Norway had also made this reservation a propos of mutual assistance in criminal matters. In this connection it was to be remembered that in the draft convention as drawn up by the ECCP, Article 13 had had a fourth paragraph prohibiting any other reservations, but this paragraph had been deleted when the Deputies had considered the draft.
The Representative of Sweden voiced a number of criticisms of Recommendation 852 from its preamble onwards and in particular of paragraph 10, which seemed to conflict with the freedom of the press guaranteed by the Swedish Constitution. He expressed reservations about paragraph 15(i) (a) and (b), and paragraph 15(ii), (vi) and (viii). With regard to paragraph 15(vii), he said that Sweden had ratified the convention. He saw nothing to prevent the ad hoc terms of reference for the PV-AV being adopted, but on the other hand did not think it necessary to convene a Conference of Ministers responsible for Public Security. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 62 - Item XVII
The Representative of Norway agreed with the Representatives of Denmark and Sweden.
The Representative of the Netherlands expressed reservations about convening such a conference. He considered that the Assembly's proposals in paragraphs 15(i)(b) and 15(iii) were unrealistic.
The Representative of Greece approved of the Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism which his authorities were thinking of ratifying shortly. A law based on the Convention had been enacted in Greece in May 1978. He had no objection to the recommendations contained in paragraphs (ii) and(iii). As to convening a Conference of Ministers in this field, he had doubts about the advisability of doing so, since it could raise a false alarm and produce the opposite effect from that intended.
The Representative of Spain pointed out that Recommendation 852 raised a general problem which, as the Spanish Prime Minister had said at the rostrum of the Assembly, was of vital importance to European democracy. It was essential that Council of Europe member States should act jointly and unanimously in this sphere. The Council of Europe, whose purpose was to defend the democratic order, was indeed the Organisation best suited to carrying out this task successfully; the question should not be whether its image would thereby suffer, but rather whether it was its duty to embark on such a course. The Recommendation contained several proposals, some more concrete than others, but the whole package should not be shelved on the pretext that some of them were vague. He was consequently in favour of forwarding the text to the Committee of Experts (PC-AV) for an opinion.
The Representative of Italy said that his authorities had followed the Assembly's debate on the problem of terrorism with all the attention it deserved and could not but approve of the Organisation's growing interest in one of the most serious problems facing democratic societies. The debate on the subject had been particularly thorough and it had been possible to look at all the aspects of this very complex matter; the end result had been a detailed Recommendation, which contained a number of interesting proposals. CONFIDENTIAL
- 63 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XVII
In principle his delegation was able to agree with most of the points in the Recommendation. It was felt, however, that points (v), (ix) and (x) should be considered in another context, namely that of whether to convene a Conference of Ministers of Public Security, a possibility which the Committee should consider in accordance with the decision taken at the 63rd Session of the Committee of Ministers.
As regards convening the said Conference of Ministers of Public Security, his delegation had no objection of principle but wished to point out that the question of convening such a conference should be studied bearing in mind:
1. the need for compatibility between the practical co-operative measures on which the Ministers would have to take a decision and the Council of Europe's organisational structure. This required preliminary study of the co-operation programmes to be adopted, which should be made by senior civil servants who were at the same time experts capable of putting up to political leaders practical proposals which could be carried out within the framework of the Organisation rather than merely an agenda of problems for discussion.
2. The need to avoid overlapping. The Secretariat had already drawn attention to the need for avoiding duplication with the ICPO (Interpol). It should also be added that there were other forms of collaboration currently in existence which should be allowed to develop without interference.
The Secretariat had put forward a number of ideas in the appendix to its document CM(79)18 which the Italian delegation thought it would be particularly appropriate to study - such as harmonising legislation on explosives and similar materials and controlling their movement; studying and subsequently adopting legislation to restrict the use of insurance in the event of kidnapping; and resuming and intensifying work already done by the Council in order to evolve standards which would preclude forgery and falsification of identity papers. As to other measures which might be looked at by a committee of senior civil servants, further pause for reflection seemed necessary to enable all the relevant ministries in the countries represented to complete their study of the document provided by the Secretariat.
The Representative of Austria thought that co-operation within the Council of Europe was essential in the fight against terrorism and that further steps should be taken in that direction. He reminded his colleagues in this context of the Ministerial Declaration on Terrorism of 23 November 1978. As for Recommendation 852, he shared the doubts about certain points in paragraph 15 which had been expressed by some delegations, but stressed that for the time being there was no question of sending a recommendation to governments but merely of requesting the appropriate committee to give an opinion. Such an opinion should cover the whole of paragraph 15, including the question whether or not to hold a conference of specialised ministers. An interim reply could be sent to the Assembly in April. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 64 - Item XVII
The Representative of Turkey said that acts of violence presented a major problem, which called for world-wide as well as regional co-operation. He was accordingly in favour of holding a Conference of Ministers responsible for Public Security.
The Representative of Switzerland broadly endorsed the proposals made by the Assembly in Recommendation 852, including the recommendation that a Conference of Ministers responsible for Public Security should be convened. He suggested that a committee of senior officials should be made responsible for organising such a conference. He shared the view that in addition to multilateral co-operation there remained a need for bilateral co-operation or co-operation between small groups of countries, but this did not make anti-terrorist action on a larger scale redundant.
The Representative of Belgium was in favour of the draft ad hoc terms of reference for the PC-AV and the draft reply to Recommendation 852 set out in Notes on the Agenda No. 2862.
On a proposal from the Chairman an indicative vote was taken on the Austrian proposal to instruct the PC-AV to give an opinion on paragraph 15 (i) to (x) of the Recommendation. The result was: 8 votes in favour, 2 votes against and 9 abstentions.
A second vote on the proposed ad hoc terms of reference to the PC- AV to give an opinion on paragraph 15 (i) to (ix) yielded the following result: 8 votes in favour, 2 votes against and 9 abstentions.
The Representative of Ireland proposed that a final vote should be taken on the question.
The Representative of Italy suggested dealing with the proposed terms of reference for the PC-AV by taking a separate vote on each point in paragraph 15.
The Representative of Portugal proposed postponing the discussion to a later meeting, seeing that some delegations had no instructions on the matter.
Decision
The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level). CONFIDENTIAL
- 65 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XVIII
XVIII.
IMPLEMENTATION AND REVISION OF THE EUROPEAN SOCIAL CHARIER Recommendation 839 (Concl(79)300/XVII, CM(78)3l5)
I. Secretariat of the Committee of Independent Experts
The Representative of Switzerland drew attention to the slowness of the procedure for supervising the application of the Charter and to the fact that the Committee of Independent Experts had several times expressed a wish for a sufficiently large Secretariat, and said he was consequently surprised to discover that for several years now a member of staff working for the secretariat of that committee and whose work had given complete satisfaction had been employed on temporary contracts and only intermittently. He hoped that the Secretary General would be able to settle this problem satisfactorily, particularly in view of the need to speed up each phase of the procedure for supervising the application of the Charter.
The Director of Political Affairs said that the Secretary General intended making proposals to this effect in the draft budget for 1980.
II. Ad hoc terms of reference for the CDAS and the CAHDH
A propos of the draft ad hoc terms of reference for the Steering Committee for Social Affairs, the Representative of Switzerland proposed deleting from the text the reference to Part 8A and, from Part 8C, items 8C I.1 and 8C I.2.
The Representative of Greece opposed adopting the text of the ad hoc terms of reference apart from Part 8A.
The Representative of Italy was able to accept the Secretariat's draft. He would, however, have liked the Committee of Ministers itself to study Part 8A, as had been suggested by the Representative of Switzerland.
The Representative of Spain, while accepting the proposed text, suggested that in order to allay the fears expressed by some delegations, the following phrase should be added to the ad hoc terms of reference: "... bearing in mind that any revision of the Charter should be designed to encourage and not to discourage ratification by member States which have not yet ratified it". Moreover, the CDAS should be informed that, when carrying out its terms of reference, it could, if necessary, give priority to drawing up an opinion on Part 8A of the Recommendation. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 66 - Item XVIII
The text of the ad hoc terms of reference for the CDAS, amended in the light of the suggestions made by the Representative of Spain, was adopted with 15 votes in favour, 0 against and 3 abstentions. The text of the ad hoc terms of reference of the CAHDH, with the amendment proposed by the Representative of Spain for the ad hoc terms of reference for the CDAS, was adopted with 14 votes in favour, 0 against and 3 abstentions.
III. Request for an opinion on Recommendation 839 from the Committee of Independent Experts
The Representative of the United Kingdom thought it premature to ask the Committee's opinion.
The Representative of Sweden wanted to know what the budgetary effects of such a request would be.
The Director of Economic and Social Affairs said that detailed study of Recommendation 839 by the Committee of Independent Experts with a view to formulating an opinion would increase the current workload and probably take up several meetings. Given the need to avoid delaying the current study of the reports in the 6th supervision phase, it might be necessary to consider holding one or two extra meetings.
The Representative of Belgium was not opposed to the idea of consulting the Committee of Independent Experts, but this should not be done before the other bodies concerned had expressed their opinion on he matter.
The Representative of Norway thought it nonetheless useful to benefit from the experience and knowledge of the Independent Experts when working on revising the Charter.
Following a vote, the Chairman recorded that the Deputies did not wish to consult the Committee of Independent Experts on the Social Charter for the time being. CONFIDENTIAL
- 67 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XVIII
Decisions
The Deputies i. adopted Decision No. CM/127/300379 assigning ad hoc terms of reference to the Steering Committee on Social Affairs (CDAS), as it appears at Appendix V to these Conclusions; ii. adopted Decision No. CM/128/300379 assigning ad hoc terms of reference to the Ad Hoc Committee of Experts for the Follow-up to the Declaration on Human Rights (CAHDH), as it appears at Appendix VI to these Conclusions; iii. agreed to forward to the Assembly for an opinion, the draft revised questionmaire for supervising the application of the Charter, adopted by the Governmental Committee on the Charter; iv. instructed the Secretariat to prepare, for their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level), a draft interim reply to Recommendation 839 in the light of the decisions (i) - (iii) above. CONFIDENTIAL
- 69 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XIX
XIX. TRIPARTITE CONFERENCE ON EMPLOYMENT (Concl(79)300/XXXI(c), CM(79)56)
The Representative of Sweden said it would be useful to hear the employers' representatives, before taking any decision whatever on the tripartite conference.
This view was shared by the Representatives of Switzerland, Belgium, and the Federal Republic of Germany, who also stressed the need to select a date after the ILO regional conference due to be held in October 1979.
The Representatives of Denmark, France and Spain said that their governments still supported the idea of holding the conference, and hoped that it would take place in 1980.
The Representative of Norway said that the attitude of her Government remained unchanged, namely that it would still maintain its offer to act as host to the conference on employment when all the conditions for its success were met.
Decision
The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level). CONFIDENTIAL
- 71 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XX
XX. RELATIONS WITH MANAGEMENT AND LABOUR (Concl(79)300/XXXI(i), CM(79)100)
The Chairman welcomed Mr. Vetter and briefly summed up the main aspects of the co-operation which had developed between the Council of Europe and both sides of industry.
Mr. Vetter made the following statement:
"Mr Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen,
I welcome the invitation to talk to you - from the standpoint of the European Trade Union Confederation - about co-operation between the Council of Europe and the ETUC with particular reference to certain questions of particular concern to workers. I hope you agree that I should use this opportunity above all to put forward also one or two critical observations about our co-operation.
My first topic concerns the role of management and labour in the framework of the Council of Europe. Within the European Community, a whole range of institutional measures for the involvement of management and labour are being taken - I am thinking especially of the Economic and Social Committee and the Standing Committee on Employment; EFTA in Geneva has set up a Consultative Committee involving both sides of industry; in OECD the workers' organisations have a special advisory committee at their disposal; in almost all European and international organisations, management and labour participate on an institutional level as a matter of principle; and yet nothing of the kind applies to the Council of Europe. Only very seldom has co-operation between the Council of Europe and the ETUC extended beyond the stage of rather non-committal and often belated consultation. I say this not because I have a particular liking for new institutions, but because I am convinced that such a wide-ranging organisation as the Council of Europe cannot ultimately do without the lasting involvement of management and labour.
As you know, the co-operation of the ETUC in discussions concerning the Social Charter - a theme which I propose to discuss - is both considerable and essential. In creating the ETUC, the trade unions have set up an organisation which goes well beyond the frontiers of the European Community and covers practically the same territorial area as the Council of Europe. This is surely a good foundation for the further development and improvement of our co-operation. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 72 - Item XX
I do not over-estimate the power of the trade unions to act when I say that international conventions designed to safeguard and extend the rights of working people always call for political implementation in the framework of national policy. The trade unions can play an important role in this respect. But only if they are involved in the development and formulation of such conventions from the very beginning and on an equal footing.
May I suggest that one could start by organising an annual conference between the Council of Europe and the two sides of industry to discuss matters on which the co-operation of management and labour is necessary. Subsequently, it should be established which are the committees and groups of experts in whose work the representatives of management and labour can take part on an equal footing. Such an arrangement would be fully in accord with the corresponding resolutions of the Assembly of the Council of Europe. On behalf of the ETUC I can at any rate assure you of our interest in an arrangement of this kind; as we see it, the role of the Council of Europe would be strengthened by this development.
I now wish to touch upon a theme which is not a point at issue between us but one on which we are grateful to acknowledge your support. For some time, the ETUC has advocated the convening of a Tripartite Conference on Employment. True, our experience of such events in the past in the framework of the European Community is not unreservedly encouraging. But we consider this to be a fundamentally indispensable instrument, if it is improved and reformed, since only in this way can we achieve a co-ordinated European economic and social policy. And that, in view of the ominous situation that prevails in our labour markets, is urgently necessary. None of us take the view that these problems can be solved only in a national framework. And no one in the ETUC is of the opinion that efforts to reach a European solution should be confined to the context of the EEC.
I therefore convey to you the formal wish of the ETUC, which is that the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe reach a decision as soon as possible on the place and date of such a conference and the principles for its organisation. The ETUC is prepared to offer its unlimited co-operation in the preparatory stages. There must be a successful attempt to reconcile two requirements. On the one hand the social and economic situation in Europe requires that this project be handled purposefully; but at the same time there is no doubt that the outcome of such a conference will depend on careful organisational and political preparation. CONFIDENTIAL
- 73 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XX
I should like to conclude my introductory remarks by saying something about the Social Charter. The Charter can certainly be described without qualification as the most comprehensive basic document governing social relations in Europe. The question concerning us all is according to what criteria can the Social Charter be adjusted to comply with current developments and what we must do jointly to ensure that the Charter's provisions are incorporated into the political practice of all our countries. I shall refer to a number of examples in order to try to explain what the main concerns of the European trade unions are in this connection. There can be no doubt that the Charter's provision to the effect that all employees in Europe must have two weeks annual holiday is no longer in keeping with the times. Furthermore, the requirement that particularly dangerous jobs should be compensated for by extra leave no longer corresponds to the actual socio-political situation, since the trade unions in all our countries are urging that such jobs should be abolished. Our main concern here is that technological progress should be harnessed to improve and humanise working conditions.
It is in the interest of the trade unions in all European countries to prevent the Social Charter and its progressive provisions being dealt with, so to say, behind closed doors. Furthermore, ways and means must be sought to make the Social Charter legally binding at international level as far as possible. Violations of the Charter's provisions must be subject to court proceedings. The "voluntary self- control" method, deemed to be adequate by a number of European Governments, is certainly not sufficient. The European trade unions demand to be associated more directly than hitherto in the work of the Governmental Committee of the Social Charter which reports to the Committee of Ministers on observance of the provisions of the Social Charter. The ETUC and its affiliated federations wish, and I say that bluntly, representatives of the trade unions to be associated in the same way as those of the governments in the control of observance of the Social Charter. Only thus can compliance be guaranteed and only thus will it be possible for trade unions in countries which have not yet ratified the Charter (and I learn with astonishment that there are some), to press more strongly than hitherto for ratification. In conclusion, I should like to refer to two provisions in the Charter which I regard as particularly important in the present economic and social situation: Article 1 calls upon the governments to do all in their power to raise the level of employment until full employment is achieved. And lastly, Article 2 requires the governments to reduce working hours progressively in relation to the increase in productivity. These two provisions merely describe the central aims of all European trade union organisations. Let us all do everything within the bounds of our possibilities, whilst respecting the differing conditions in our countries, to ensure that these provisions find concrete political expression in the near future." CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 74 - Point XX
The Chairman thanked Mr. Vetter for his most interesting statement.
The Representative of Ireland stressed the differing vocations and possibilities of the European Community and the Council of Europe and asked in what field there could be profitable consultations between the Council of Europe and the social partners. He recalled the work of the last Tripartite Conference of the European Community, which had dealt with employment problems and the difficulties which the parties present had encountered when seeking to arrive at a consensus of opinion.
Mr. Vetter was of the opinion that the Treaty of Rome was too restricted to determine the economic construction of the Community and that a gap was apparent in respect of social policy. The trade unions believed that closer contacts with the Council of Europe in this field could lead to a positive symbiosis between economic concerns on the one hand and the opportunities for political solutions offered by the Council of Europe on the other. On the whole, the Tripartite Conferences had proved their worth and even their necessity, although the last one had been rather disappointing. New solutions should be considered in that connection. On the other hand, the European trade unions could not afford to neglect the opportunities for solutions in the field of social policy offered by the Council of Europe.
The Representative of Norway put three questions to Mr. Vetter:
i. What subjects could usefully be discussed at the Tripartite Conference planned under the auspices of the Council of Europe?
ii. What were Mr. Vetter's impressions after his recent visit to the Nordic countries?
iii.A delegation from the ETUC had recently had talks with Mr. Giscard d'Estaing, Chairman in office of the European Council. What could Mr. Vetter report on the results of that meeting.
Mr. Vetter thought that a Tripartite Conference under the auspices of the Council of Europe should concern itself first and foremost with the problems of full employment and technological development. Particular importance should be attached to new adjustments to working hours from the point of view of a labour market policy. That discussion obviously concerned the whole of western Europe and could not be confined to the geographical limits of the Community. Regarding his visit to CONFIDENTIAL
- 75 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XX
the Nordic countries, Mr. Vetter said that this was part of the regular consultations with the governments and trade unions of these countries, and such consultations were extremely useful. As for the meeting with the Chairman in office of the European Council, Mr. Giscard d'Estaing, Mr. Vetter explained that such meetings took place before every European summit. This last meeting had shown that at present the aim was to find solutions to Europe's economic problems and that social questions had been given second place for the time being.
The Representative of Turkey made the following statement:
"I should like to thank Mr. Vetter warmly for his clear, precise and incisive comments. He laid particular emphasis in his statement on three issues:
1. The need for closer and more effective co-operation between the ETUC and the Council of Europe in its steering committees
2. The urgent need for a tripartite conference on employment
3. The Social Charter and its revision.
I have taken note that the ETUC is concerned with all these matters, and has made certain requests, and shall make a point of notifying my authorities accordingly.
I should like to take the opportunity of stressing that the Council of Europe is made up of 21 member countries, the majority (including my own) having been members since the inception of the Council of Europe in 1949.
This tribune, before which the Chairman of the European Trade Union Confederation has just spoken with authority and eloquence, is that of the Europe of parliamentary democracies, fundamental liberties, the European Convention on Human Rights, the Social Charter.
A decision to hold a tripartite conference on the acutely topical questions of employment and unemployment can only be taken by the Committee of Ministers unanimously, after reaching a consensus. Furthermore, it is only possible to decide on more direct and permanent co-operation between the ETUC and the Council of Europe steering committees in two stages, and in accordance with the procedure in force. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 76 - Item XX
As in all democratic organisations, we also have our rules of procedure to which we remain jealously attached, as a guarantee of the serious intent, the continuity and the spirit of solidarity which mark our work.
In fact the European Trade Union Confederation has a view, a concept, a definition of Europe which differ from those of the Council of Europe. With its present structures, it gives the impression of a private club, a charmed circle, representing a Europe that is smaller than our own. It does not have enough body, in our view, to fill our European stew-pan.
I have been asked, Mr. Chairman, to voice today the disappointment and bitterness of the two principal and largest trade unions in my country, DISK and TÜRK IS, and of some two million Turkish trade union members, at the obstinately and constantly negative attitude of the European Trade Union Confederation, which for five years has refused them membership and closed the door of the Confederation to them, needless to say after putting the matter to the vote.
The majority rule is a rule which we too respect, as we respect the other arrangements laid down in our own procedure.
But this will not prevent me from saying that, given the Confederation's determination to remain hemmed in, enclosed within its European redoubt, it cannot be regarded by ourselves - and here I mean the Turkish trade unions and my Government - within this body represented by the Council of Europe, as a valid partner in the matter."
Mr. Vetter said that the problem of the accession of the Turkish trade unions should be viewed in a more general context. The ETUC had always adopted an outward looking approach, subject to certain conditions. It had gone beyond the strict confines of Europe and established relations with trade unions in the countries of the Maghreb, Libya and other signatory states to the Lomé Convention. This item was still being discussed in the ETUC and no final decision had been taken. He recalled the origins of the ETUC; it had been founded as a joint organisation of free and Christian trade unions in the countries of the European Community and EFTA.
ETUC's main concern in the European Community was the situation of 6 million unemployed persons, including 20% among the younger generations, who were awaiting a speedy solution to their problem. In future, a purely economic approach to these questions would have to be ruled out. CONFIDENTIAL
- 77 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XX
The Representative of Turkey replied to Mr. Vetter as follows:
"Mr. Chairman - and I should like to address my remarks to Mr. Vetter as well - I am grateful for your explanations, although I am not able to say that I find them satisfactory.
First of all, I am entirely unable to understand the reasons prompting you to tell us about the difficulties experienced by the ETUC in its dealings with the countries of the Lomé Conference, the countries of the Magreb, Morocco, Libya and Algeria. Turkey is not an African, but a European country.
Just that part of Turkey which is situated on the continent of Europe is much bigger in terms of area, population and the number of trade union members, than those of certain ETUC countries.
I am obliged to say once more that until such time as the ETUC decides to make good the deficiencies in its knowledge of European geography and politics, I shall not revise my attitude towards the ETUC as outlined just now."
In response to a question by the Representative of Switzerland, Mr Vetter said that the trade unions in the European Community which were members of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) had first had a liaison bureau providing for contacts with the authorities of the European Community. Subsequently, the unions in ICFTU had come together, at European level, to form the European Confederation of Free Trade Unions (CESL). The latter had been replaced in 1973 by the present ETUC, comprising the unions of EFTA and a number of other countries, in addition to those of the Community countries. Shortly after its foundation, it had opened its ranks to the members of the World Confederation of Labour (WCL), composed of Christian unions.
In reply to the statement by the Representative of Turkey, Mr Vetter said that he had certainly not intended to make international comparisons when speaking of Turkey in the context of relations between the ETUC and the unions of the Mediterranean countries and the Lomé Convention. As Chairman of the German Trade Union Confederation (DGB), he was, on the contrary, able to say that relations between the DGB and the Türk Is were good. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 78 - Item XX
He hoped that the ETUC would not be subjected to pressure, particularly in respect of the accession of trade unions representing denominations other than that of the present member organisations. He trusted that everybody would be sympathetic if the ETUC did not quickly reach a consensus of opinion on this matter. He concluded by expressing the hope that the ETUC would be given an opportunity to establish close co-operation with the Council of Europe.
Mr Vetter expressed his regret at not having more time for conversations with the Ministers' Deputies because of urgent business which compelled him to return to Brussels. He thanked the Deputies for the reception they had given him and for their attention.
After Mr Vetter had left, the Representative of Austria expressed his deep disappointment at the hearing which had just ended. Only four Deputies had been able to speak. That should not be allowed to happen again and the Deputies should have adequate time for a genuine dialogue at such hearings.
The Secretary to the Committee explained that Mr Vetter, who had a very full timetable, had come from Brussels expecially for this hearing and had to return there to meet Mr Jenkins, the President of the Commission of the European Communities at 6 pm.
The Representative of Switzerland felt it necessary to recall the historical reality. There had been up to the end of 1972 an "EFTA- TUC" organisation composed of representatives of the British, Scandanavian, Austrian and Swiss trade unions. After the accession of the United Kingdom and Denmark to the EEC, the unions in these two countries had wished to maintain their links with the other member organisations of EFTA-TUC, and that had finally led to the enlargement of that organisation by the accession of further national trade unions, and thus caused it to change its name to ETUC. CONFIDENTIAL
- 79 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XX
The Representative of Belgium, like the Representative of Austria, regretted that there had not been a genuine dialogue, but said that his government was extremely interested in the institutionalisation of contacts with both sides of industry in the context of a tripartite conference.
The Representatives of Norway and Ireland expressed their satisfaction at the exchange of views with Mr Vetter.
In reply to the Representative of Belgium, who had asked whether there had recently been a change of attitude on the employers' side towards the Council of Europe, the Director of Economic and Social Affairs reminded the Deputies of the transfer of the mandate of the International Organisation of Employers (Geneva) as spokesman of the European employers' associations at the Council of Europe, to the Union of Industries of the European Community (UNICE). Whilst membership of IOE was worldwide UNICE was composed solely of European employers' associations. In addition to the associations in the countries of the European Community which were full members, the employers' associations of all the other member States of the Council of Europe except Cyprus, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Malta, were associate members of UNICE. He drew the Deputies' attention to document CM(79)78 containing the letter from the Secretary General of IOE of 14 February 1979.
In reply to a question by the Representative of Switzerland he said that IOE had never applied for consultative status with the Council of Europe.
Decisions
The Deputies i. agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level) in the light inter alia of the hearing of the ETUC Chairman; ii. instructed the Secretary General to inform the UNICE that they were ready to hear a representative of this organisation if it so wishes at one of their forthcoming meetings. CONFIDENTIAL
- 81 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXI
XXI. 30TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE (Concl(79)300/XXXI(f), CM(79)46 and 94)
1. Proposal to organise a European folk festival
The Representative of Turkey noted from CM(79)94 that the Directorate of Press and Information Services would not be able to organise a folk festival in May. He doubted whether the Directorate had made every endeavour to do so. He also thought the estimated cost of about 260,000 FF was highly exaggerated. According to his own calculations, such an event should not cost more than 70,000 FF, travelling expenses being borne by governments. He was therefore ready to agree to the festival being postponed to the autumn.
The Representative of Italy asked when the film to be produced by FR3 could be made available to television companies and whether it would be free of charge. It might be shown on all national television networks on 5 May.
The Deputy Director of Press and Information Services, in reply to the Representative of Turkey, said that his department had been no less diligent in investigating the Turkish proposal than it was in carrying out all its tasks; specialists in public relations and audio- visual media had been called in to study the proposal.
As regards travelling expenses, it was stated that they would be borne by governments. The calculations had been made on the basis of fifteen people per country and the cheapest fares. But the question was whether this financial effort warranted being made by governments. The original idea had been to give the festival a character transcending the Franco-German region, and it was in this light that the matter had been considered.
With regard to the question put by the Representative of Italy, FR3 had made two proposals: one was to make a 13-minute film dealing solely with the Council of Europe, the other to make a film on the European institutions. In the former case the film could be offered to TV companies without delay. The DPI had approached several TV companies but they had shown no interest. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 82 - Item XXI
The Representative of Austria observed that only four delegations, including his own, had replied. It did not therefore seem very realistic to think of organising a festival for 5 May. Well-balanced regional participation was the minimum requirement. The event should be envisaged for the autumn.
The Representative of Portugal considered that, in view of the slight interest shown by delegations, it was better to give up the idea of a festival.
The Representative of Sweden said that his authorities could entertain the possibility of Sweden participating provided that the festival was well-balanced geographically.
The Representative of Norway said that her country's participation would depend to a large degree on whether TV coverage was available for the festival.
The Representative of the Netherlands considered, like the Representatives of Austria and Portugal, that as delegations had not shown enough interest, it would be better to envisage alternative arrangements.
A sounding revealed that only nine delegations were contemplating the possibility of sending a folk group.
The Chairman, summing up the discussion, noted that the festival could not be organised for 5 May. There remained the question of what the Committee of Ministers was to do to celebrate the 30th Anniversary.
2. Celebration of the 30th Anniversary
Referring to a suggestion by the Representative of the Netherlands, the Director of Political Affairs reminded the Deputies that at their 262nd meeting they had adopted Resolution(76)48 on the celebration of Europe Day. One of the recommendations to governments therein was to "mark the solemnity of Europe Day by an address by the Head of State or a member of the government, to be given if possible over the radio and/or television network". CONFIDENTIAL
- 83 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXI
The Representative of Luxembourg favoured celebrating the 30th Anniversary in the context of Europe Day. In this connection he drew attention to Resolution(64)16 instituting Europe Day.
Referring to CM(79)46 and the moral and practical support envisaged for NOOs in connection with the direct elections to the European Parliament, he expressed surprise at this proposal in view of the amount of money being spent on the election campaign.
The Deputy Director of Press and Information Services recalled the reply given to this question at the 300th meeting (item XXXI(f)), namely that the idea was to try to turn to account the general interest in Europe that the European Parliament elections would arouse.
With regard to the question of how the Committee of Ministers could mark the 30th Anniversary, the Chairman could not give a final reply at the present stage, but suggested that a distinguished guest might be invited to attend a ceremonial sitting of the Committe.
The Representative of Austria suggested that the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers address a message to the public and that part of the press communiqué of the 64th Session on 10 May be devoted to the 30th Anniversary.
The Representative of Denmark suggested inviting Mr Pflimlin to speak at a ceremonial sitting of the Deputies on 5 May.
The Representative of Switzerland wondered whether the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers could come and Chair the sitting.
The Director of Political Affairs announced that according to unconfirmed reports Mr Chaban-Delmas would be in Strasbourg on 5 May. He might perhaps make a speech in the Assembly Chamber in his capacity as Chairman of the French National Committee for Europe Day.
The Chairman did not think that his Minister could come on 5 May, seeing that he would be coming in any case on 9 and 10 May. The Deputies might hold a short ceremonial sitting at which they could adopt a declaration on the work accomplished by the Committee of Ministers (for instance, during the previous five years). The Secretariat might make proposals on the subject. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 84 - Item XXI
The Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany reiterated the question he had asked at the 300th meeting concerning the possibility of the concert being broadcast by Eurovision.
The Representative of Luxembourg asked what were the respective contributions of the City of Strasbourg and the Council of Europe towards the concert. The concert might be preceded by speeches by the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers and Mr Pflimlin so as to make it quite clear that it was intended to celebrate the Council's 30th Anniversary.
The Deputy Director of Press and Information Services said that the Council's contribution was 25,000 FF and the city's 10,000 FF, to which should be added 12,000 FF for use of the concert hall and for staff. He thought the idea of the concert being preceded by a very short speech was a good one. The concert was entitled "Grand European concert on the occasion of the 30th Anniversary of the Council of Europe". In reply to the Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany, he said that the standard of the concert would be very good but not high enough to interest Eurovision.
Decision
The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level). CONFIDENTIAL
- 85 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXII
XXII. ORGANISATION OF A 3RD JOINT CONFERENCE (COUNCIL OF EUROPE/EUROPEAN CONFERENCE OF MINISTERS OF TRANSPORT) ON ROAD SAFETY EDUCATION IN SCHOOLS (Concl(79)300/XIX, CM(78)343, CM(79)82)
The Representative of Switzerland said that he was not satisfied with Secretariat document CM(79)82 for a number of reasons.
First, it assumed that the Conference could not take place before 1980, whilst the Swiss authorities were of the opinion that it should be held in 1979 in order to constitute a Council of Europe contribution to the International Year of the Child.
Second, the document implied that the Conference could not be held without three preparatory meetings, and that seemed exaggerated. One or two preparatory meetings would be quite enough, provided that they did not take the form of a small group, but were held at the level of a committee of senior officials on which all the member States were represented.
Lastly, the Secretariat's proposals had considerable budgetary implications. But if the Swiss formula were adopted, ie if one or two meetings of senior officials were convened and the travel and subsistence expenses of those attending were borne by each government, the total cost of a meeting could be considerably reduced, since it would only involve the Secretariat's expenses, which would in any case be shared between the Council of Europe and ECMT. He stressed the importance attached by the Swiss authorities to this Conference, because in a Europe where the fall in the birthrate was extremely disquieting, every effort should be made to prevent these few children dying as a result of road accidents. Such accidents were, alas, all too frequent.
The Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany had already spoken in favour of this Conference at the 298th meeting and he said that his authorities could agree to all the Secretariat proposals in document CM(79)82.
The Representative of the Netherlands, supported by the Representative of Cyprus, said that he now came out in favour of the proposed Conference. His authorities had no preference as to whether it should be held in 1979 or 1980, but thought that it should be adequately prepared. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 86 - Item XXII
The Representative of Denmark said that his authorities were not greatly in favour of the organisation of such a Conference, but if agreement were reached in the Committee, he would not oppose the idea. Nevertheless he did have doubts about the desirability of holding such a Conference at ministerial level.
The Representative of Switzerland explained that, in the present case, this would certainly not be a Conference of Specialised Ministers within the meaning of Resolution(71)44, but a Conference to which the governments of the Council of Europe member States and ECMT would send delegations whose rank they would themselves decide upon. As for the financial problem, he was supported by the Representative of Belgium when he said that if the political will to hold such a Conference existed, it should be possible to release appropriations to that end; the more so since the Swiss formula would cost much less than the figure quoted by the Secretariat. He thought it would be very possible to arrange for the Conference during the course of the current year. A preliminary meeting of senior officials could be convened in April or May and a second in September or October. The Conference itself could take place in November or December.
The Representative of France said that the Swiss proposal would undoubtedly be less expensive, but he still could not see under which budgetary head appropriations could be released. His authorities had been extremely interested in the Secretariat proposals contained in paragraph 2 page 3 of the document, designed to place the Conference in the context of the European campaign for urban renewal.
The Representative of Spain said he had listened to the Swiss Representative's proposals with interest for the following reasons: First, he believed that an Organisation such as the Council of Europe was duty bound to make a contribution to the Year of the Child and second, he would always support initiatives designed to develop contacts between two international Organisations.
The Representative of Greece supported the Swiss point of view, but was doubtful about the date of the Conference. It seemed to him that the Council of Europe was already making a contribution to the Year of the Child, since a Conference on pre-school education was to be organised in November this year, under the auspices of the CDCC.
The Director of Economic and Social Affairs added that the Conference of Ministers responsible for family affairs, which was to be held in Athens in May this year, was also a contribution to the World Year of the Child, since the theme was "Equality of opportunities for children". Furthermore, the Directorate of Economic and Social Affairs was planning to produce, before the end of the year, a booklet designed to take stock of the activities in the social field concerned with childhood. CONFIDENTIAL
- 87 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXII
An indicative vote on the question whether a Conference should be held during the current year produced the following result: 16 in favour, none against and 3 abstentions.
the Chairman instructed the Secretariat to contact the Secretariat of ECMT to find out whether that Organisation agreed that the Conference could be organised during the current year. He also asked that the Committee should be provided with figures showing the exact cost of the Swiss proposal.
The following day, the Deputy Director of Education, Culture and Sport reported on a telephone conversation he had had on Thursday, 29 March, with Mr Auerbach, Deputy to Mr Billet, Secretary General of the European Conference of Ministers of Transport.
Mr Auerbach had warmly welcomed the desire expressed by the Deputies to do everything possible to arrange the 3rd Joint (Council of Europe/ European Conference of Ministers of Transport) Conference on road safety education in schools as soon as possible. His Organisation shared that desire.
Four items had been discussed: i. The possibility of bringing forward the date of the Conference in order to hold it in 1979 as a contribution to the International Year of the Child
Although interested in the idea of a contribution to the International Year of the Child, Mr Auerbach had not thought it possible to consider holding the Conference as early as 1979. Actually, even if ECMT had had the necessary appropriations this year, and that was not the case, it would have been impossible, from the organisational point of view, to prepare the Conference adequately in such a short period.
But since appropriations had been provided for in 1980, it would be possible to hold the Conference during the first six months of 1980, and thus follow in the wake of the campaign for the International Year of the Child.
2. Nature of the Conference
The word "conference" was misleading, because it gave the impression of a spectacular, even a ministerial, event, and that was not the case. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 88 - Item XXII
Mr Auerbach had felt that it would be a Scientific Symposium attended by experts. The results alone should be the subject of a publicity campaign, possibly with the use of the media. However, for the sake of continuity, the term "conference" should be maintained; it had indeed been used for the first two events (in Paris and Vienna).
3. Theme
If the CDCC had not felt it possible to give high priority to the Conference, that was doubtless because the theme proposed was restricted to road safety education in schools. But that aspect of the problem had been widely studied and, in the absence of new developments prompting a need for this education to be given a new slant, there seemed to be no urgent reason for it to be reviewed at the present time. On the other hand, the important question today was what children (and adolescents) did, or did not do, with this education. The problem thus became very topical and increased in interest, because it was then approached not just from the angle of education in schools (an aspect to which the CDCC would undoubtedly be prepared to contribute), but also from that of the child's psychology, his behaviour and the conditions in which he had to apply the education received in the context of his urban environment. These questions had only been touched on, but Mr Auerbach had felt that their study would enhance the symposium and interest the ECMT experts, notably because of the multi-disciplinary approach which would thus be given to the Conference.
4. Administrative and financial provisions
If the Deputies accepted the timetable proposed (postponement of the Conference until the first six months of 1980), the Secretariat would prepare, in time for the 303rd meeting, concrete proposals including, in particular:
- the organisation in 1979 of two preparatory meetings (the first as soon as possible; the second at the end of the year);
- the nomination of the rapporteurs, which should be decided on at the first meeting of the working party so that the reports were available in time for the second meeting.
The Chairman announced that the Committee agreed that the Conference should be held in 1980 and that the Secretariat should be instructed to prepare a document along the lines sketched out above.
Decision
The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level) in the light of a further Secretariat document. CONFIDENTIAL
- 89 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXIII
XXIII. EUROPEAN CULTURAL CO-OPERATION Recommendation 850 (Concl(79)300/III(a))
The Representative of the United Kingdom said he had followed the debate on this Assembly Recommendation with considerable interest. Regarding paragraph 12(i), his authorities recognised the importance of the European Cultural Convention, but could not go so far as to consider it as being the one and only basis for such co-operation. As for paragraph 12(ii), (iii) and (v), his authorities believed that co-ordination between international Organisations was indeed essential, but this could best be pursued at the official level. It was rather premature, at this time, to talk about the activities of the European Foundation, which was still very much in the planning phase. His authorities were satisfied with the existing priorities between Council of Europe activities.
The Representative of Italy made the following statement:
"My authorities largely agree with the comments in the preamble to Recommendation 850, and they are prepared - in principle - to accept the recommendations addressed to the Committee of Ministers in that document. In particular, they are in favour of the Assembly's call for closer co-ordination between the Council of Europe and the European Community. However, it has to be pointed out, in that connection, that the two Organisations differ as institutions, and that is bound to have certain consequences.
That being so, Italy considers it highly desirable that the existing forms of co-operation and consultation should be developed further, particularly in specific sectors, such as - inter alia - language teaching, the European school and health record and EUDISED. The Council of Europe's experiments and the studies it has already carried out will constitute a valuable contribution to this joint work.
Lastly, regarding the European Foundation, my delegation wishes to emphasise the fact that the draft agreement providing for co-operation between the Foundation itself and other organisations already in existence and the declaration by the European Council, which will form an integral part of that agreement, should refer explicitly to the Council of Europe. As far as Italy is concerned, every effort will be made to ensure that the criteria referred to in the declaration of the European Council and the draft text relating to the Foundation are established in such a way as to take account of the need for that body to co-operate and co-ordinate its activities with the Council of Europe." CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 90 - Item XXIII
The Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany said that it was rather early to have a final discussion on the Recommendation. He could say now, however, that his authorities endorsed paragraph 12(i) in prinicple. Alongside the cultural activities of the OECD and the Community, the European Cultural Convention provided one of the main bases for European activities in the cultural field. As negotiations on the European Cultural Foundation (paragraph 12(iii)) were still continuing, he could not yet take up a position. Regarding paragraph 12(iv), he wondered what the Assembly meant by higher budgetary priority. Lastly, he thought that the CDCC should be asked to submit an opinion on the Recommendation.
The Representative of France agreed with the Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany and said that his authorities were in favour of sub-paragraphs (i) and (iv) of paragraph 12. Referring to paragraph 12(iii), he did not think it necessary to take any measures at the present time, and as for sub-paragraph (v), most of the member States of the Council of Europe were also members of the European Community, OECD and UNESCO, and could thus make their views known there at the appropriate time.
The Representative of Switzerland said that the Assembly Recommendation had come at the right time to stress the dominant role that the Council of Europe should play in cultural and educational matters. In fact, this was not just a budgetary matter; close attention should also be given to the nature of cultural co-operation in the Council of Europe. Progress to that end had been made as a result of the re- organisation of the Council for Cultural Co-operation and the Secretariat structures themselves. UNESCO was a world organisation and therefore the Council of Europe provided the best forum in which to discuss a truly European culture. As for OECD, its vocation was basically economic.
The Representatives of Austria, Norway and the Netherlands said that, on the whole, they were in favour of the provisions in Recommendation 850, but thought that no decision should be taken at the present meeting.
Decision
The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level). CONFIDENTIAL
- 91 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXIV
XXIV.
PROCEDURE FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF AUDITORS (Concl(78)297/XXII, CM(79)62)
The Representative of Luxembourg recalled that it had been he who had made the proposal that the Secretariat should be asked to prepare a document on this question, and he welcomed the suggestions made by the Secretariat in CM(79)62. There were two points, however, on which he felt that the procedure envisaged required further clarification, and proposed amendments which are incorporated in the decision below.
The Representative of Italy felt that the procedure should also specifically state that it would be in the month of December that the Deputies proceeded to the appointment of members of the Board of Auditors. This proposal is also reflected in the decision below.
In reply to a question put by the Representative of Sweden, the Director of Administration and Finance said that the new procedure could be printed in a future edition of the booklet "Texts on budgetary and financial matters", which contained inter alia the Financial Regulations and supplementary provisions.
He went on to suggest that the Deputies could ignore for the moment point (ii) of the action proposed in the Notes on the Agenda for this item. In particular earlier that same week the Standing Committee of the Assembly had adopted Recommendation 856 which included proposals concerning the Appeals Board. Furthermore, the general question of the appeals procedure was still being examined by the CAHEA.
The Chairman noted that there was general agreement with a proposal made by the Representative of the United Kingdom that the Committee could consider the question of the procedure for appointments to the Budget Committee when it came to discuss the Belgian suggestions concerning the composition of the Budget Committee at its 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level). CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 92 - Item XXIV
Decision
The Deputies adopted the following procedure for the appointment of members of the Board of Auditors:
1. Duration of term of office
The term of office of members of the Board of Auditors ends on 31 December of their sixth year in office.
2. Presentation of candidates - Timetable
- In principle, a new member should be appointed at the December meeting of the Deputies (A level) which precedes the first year of the new member's term of office;
- the Secretariat shall notify governments of a vacancy before 30 June of the last year of this term of office and candidatures should be deposited with the Secretariat before 15 October of that year;
- at the meeting of the Deputies in September, the Secretariat will remind them of this time limit and inform them of candidatures already received;
- a document listing the candidatures received by 15 October shall be issued immediately after that date; it will set out the candidates in alphabetical order of family name, together with their curricula vitae;
- if a member does not complete his term of office before the period of six years has elapsed, the proposal for a replacement for the remainder of the period should be submitted without delay to the Committee of Ministers by the state which proposed the member whose term of office has been interrupted. CONFIDENTIAL
- 93 - CM/Del/Concl (79)302 Item XXIV
3. Voting procedure
- If only one candidate is proposed to fill a vacancy, his appointment can be made without a vote unless there is an objection;
in the case of two or more candidates being proposed to fill a single vacancy, the Deputies start the selection (or elimination) procedure by holding an indicative vote by secret ballot. Subsequent procedure is then decided in the light of the outcome of the indicative vote, or subsequent indicative votes by secret ballot if they appear to be necessary;
- the ballot papers used for the secret indicative votes referred to in the preceding paragraph shall list the candidates in alphabetical order of family name and without indication of titles. The Chairman will indicate during the meeting at which moment the Secretariat should distribute the ballot papers. CONFIDENTIAL
- 95 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXV
XXV. COMPATIBILITY BETWEEN RESOLUTIONS(77)23 AND (77)24 (Concl(78)297/XXIII, CM(79)96)
Decision
The Deputies agreed to postpone consideration of this item until their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level) (see item I above). CONFIDENTIAL
- 97 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXVI
XXVI. TRAVEL EXPENSES OF GOVERNMENT EXPERTS (Concl(78)295/XII, CM(78)89, CM(79)26)
The Representative of the United Kingdom said that her authorities were opposed to the arrangements suggested by the Secretariat for calculating travelling time for journeys made by air. They felt that for journeys by air the surface transport time should be reduced by two-thirds, rather than one half as recommended by the Secretariat, for experts coming from the countries that were closer to Strasbourg. By the latter, they meant at least all the member states of the European Communities.
The Representative of Sweden pointed out that for more distant countries it was not so easy to reduce travelling time by flying. He had been discussing with the Strasbourg authorities the new air-link between Frankfurt and Strasbourg. As it stood, the schedule for this link meant that the flight from Frankfurt took off only 10 minutes after the flight from the North arrived. Experts coming from Scandinavia to Strasbourg Would have to spend the night in Frankfurt in order to use it. It was therefore of little use to them. In respect of the return journey, a similar thing occurred, namely that the flight from Strasbourg arrived on 20 minutes before the next connection for Scandinavia left Frankfurt. There was a later one for which travellers would have to wait in Frankfurt for nearly four hours. In view of this his authorities were hesitant about certain respects of the arrangements suggested by the Secretariat.
The Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany, supported by the Representatives of Austria and Belgium, said that they could accept the guidelines proposed by the Secretariat, which were in accordance with those applied in other international organisations.
The Representative of Italy was also favourable to the Secretariat proposals. He said that if the new system were introduced, he would like the Secretariat to report after a year on how it was working by comparison with the existing arrangements.
The Representative of Denmark took the opportunity to point out that the refund by the Secretariat of experts' travel and subsistence expenses sometimes took rather a long time. He asked whether part of the travel expenses might be refunded during the meetings in Strasbourg. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 98 - Item XXVI
The Representative of Turkey expressed reservations about the new method suggested for calculating travelling allowances, saying that the travelling time taken as a basis in some cases, his own country for instance, appeared less than the time it took to complete the journey to and from Strasbourg.
The Representative of Belgium said he thought it would be advisable, before taking a final decision on this item, to know what would be the effects of the new air link between Strasbourg and Frankfurt, shortly to be brought into operation.
The Representative of Sweden called for a paper setting out, by way of example, the details of the per diem allowances to be paid to experts from different countries, with an indication of the travelling time allowances envisaged by the Secretariat.
The Director of Administration and Finance said he would try to do everything necessary to speed up the payment of travel expenses. The reform under consideration by the Deputies could but make things easier. Experts could always make a request in Strasbourg for an advance. He went on to give details on the recommendations that had been made to Air France about the air link between Strasbourg and Frankfurt, and agreed to the suggestion that an information paper should be presented outlining the way in which the new system worked after it had been in operation for one year.
The Chairman said that there seemed to be general agreement on the Secretariat proposals, subject to the examination of further information to be provided by the Secretariat.
Decision
The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level) in the light, in particular, of the additional elements of information requested from the Secretariat at the present meeting. CONFIDENTIAL
- 99 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXVII(a)
XXVII. AD HOC COMMITTEE OF ADMINISTRATIVE EXPERTS (CAHEA) a. Presence of representatives of the Staff Committee in meetings of the CAHEA (Concl(79)300/XXVIII, CM(79)51)
The Representative of Belgium pointed out that in document CM(79)51 the Secretariat had provided a resumé of the situation with regard to this matter, but had not drawn any conclusions. He therefore asked the Secretariat to state what its conclusions were.
The Director of Administration and Finance recalled that CM(79)51 had been circulated at the request of the Committee in order to provide delegations with an indication in convenient form of all the facts connected with the question under consideration. He also recalled that when the Deputies had last discussed the matter, at their 300th meeting (February/March 1979 - A level), six delegations had spoken in favour of allowing the Staff Committee to be permanently present at meetings of the CAHEA, and six delegations had been in favour of maintaining the status quo. The position of the Secretariat, as described in detail in CM(79)51, remained unchanged, as did its belief that the measures proposed by the Secretary General could and did lead to a full and fruitful dialogue between the CAHEA and the Staff Committee.
The new element of which the Deputies had been seized since they last discussed the matter was the 7th Activity Report of the CAHEA, which was set out in section 8.2 of CM(79)51. There had certainly been an improvement in the situation. At the last meeting of the CAHEA representatives of the Staff Committee had been able to discuss the question of reform of the appeals procedure with the CAHEA for a total of an afternoon and half a morning. This improvement was reflected in the 7th Activity Report of the CAHEA.
The Representative of Belgium said that the statement made by the Director of Administration and Finance had amply shown that the existing system permitted adequate discussion between the CAHEA and the representatives of the staff.
The Representative of Italy observed that the point had been reached at which it was no longer a question of the Staff Committee simply making its views known to the CAHEA. The two Committees could now indeed engage in a veritable dialogue. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 100 - Item XXVII(a)
In conclusion of the discussion, the Chairman noted that while the Committee was reluctant to meet the wishes of the Staff Committee 100% by agreeing that it should have a permanent presence in meetings of the CAHEA, it felt that the underlying aspirations of the staff and at the same time the wishes of the CAHEA itself could be adequately met under the existing arrangements, which made it possible for thorough discussions to take place between those Committees.
Decision
The Deputies noted that the ad hoc terms of reference assigned to the CAHEA by Decision No. CM/101/200179 have been executed. CONFIDENTIAL
- 101 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXVII(b)
b. 8th Activity Report (Concl(78)290/XXII and XXIII, CM(79)50)
The Representative of Switzerland pointed out that a decision on the amendments to the Regulations on Appointments proposed by the CAHEA in CM(79)50 was not pressing, and as time was short at the present meeting he proposed that the item be postponed.
The Representative of Belgium supported the Swiss proposal that a decision be postponed. It was in fact the intention of his delegation to table its own amendment to Article 24 of the Regulations on Appointments after the summer holiday period. A postponement at least until September 1979 would therefore be convenient.
Decision
The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 308th meeting (September 1979 - A level). CONFIDENTIAL
- 103 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXVII(c)
c. 9th Activity Report (Concl(78)286/XXIX(c), CM(79)65)
The Representative of Austria observed that the Deputies were faced with the choice of either approving or taking note of the 9th Activity Report of the CAHEA (CM(79)65). If it were a question of approving' the Report, there were certain points' to which he would wish to draw attention. It was stated in paragraph 8 of CM(79)65,and this passage was quoted in the Notes on the Agenda for this item, that: "It is the ad hoc committee's view that if, in the event of a concerted work stoppage, the Committee of Ministers or the Secretary General thought it necessary to make certain rules, this should be done by the Secretary General in the exercise of his management functions". His authorities had considered the matter and did not share this point of view. If what would be involved was merely an internal instruction to the staff, then it would be right for the Secretary General himself to issue that instruction. On the other hand, if what would be involved were an administrative regulation, then its adoption would be the responsibility of the Committee of Ministers acting in accordance with Article 16 of the Statute of the Council of Europe.
The Committee therefore had to decide whether what it wished to do was to adopt such an administrative regulation, and this led to the fundamental question of whether strikes were to be permitted in the Organisation or not. Under Article 6(4) of the European Social Charter the contracting parties thereto did in fact recognise the right to strike. On the other hand that recognition was made "subject to obligations that might arise out of collective agreements previously entered into". In conclusion, he said that the matter was not quite so simple as it might at first sight appear, and needed to be examined very thoroughly.
The Representative of Belgium said that his authorities felt that it was for the Secretary General to shoulder his responsibility in this matter, but on the basis of guidelines laid down by the Committee of Ministers. In this connection he said that he could accept the points made in paragraph 9a, b, c and d of CM(79)65 as providing an appropriate framework within which the Secretary General could exercise his powers. On the other hand, his authorities had doubts about paragraph 9e, as what was proposed there was not in line with Belgian practice.
The Representative of Italy said that the matter under discussion was one of major importance. Unfortunately, he had not yet received an indication of the final position of his authorities. This being so, he proposed that the item be taken up at a later meeting. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 104 - Item XXVII(c)
Decision
The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 304th meeting (May 1979 - A level). CONFIDENTIAL
- 105 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXVIII(d)
d. 18th Meeting Report (CM(79)77)
Decision
The Deputies, in derogation from Article 17(f) of the Rules of Procedure for Council of Europe committees, decided in accordance with Article 21 of those Rules to allow the Chairman of the ad hoc Committee of Administrative Experts (CAHEA) to remain in office until the completion of the specific terms of reference of the said committee (1979). CONFIDENTIAL
- 107 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXVIII
XXVIII. EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT Facilities (Concl(79)300/XXXI(j))
The Chairman welcomed Mr. Henry Bernard, architect of the Palais de l'Europe, who had kindly offered to come to the meeting to explain the latest situation with regard to the projects concerning passages to be built linking the new building to be erected for the European Parliament with the Palais de l'Europe.
Mr. Bernard said that he had been asked two or three months previously to give his opinion on the raised walkway projects. He had discussed the matter in Paris with the City of Strasbourg architects department on two or three occasions, and there had been a meeting in Strasbourg on 19 March 1979 attended by the Director of Administration and Finance of the Council of Europe, the Architect in Chief of the City of Strasbourg, and himself. The problem as defined by the European Parliament was that it wanted convenient and rapid access between the new building to be placed at its disposal by the City of Strasbourg, and the Chamber of the Assembly. A number of projects for raised walkways had been considered. Footbridges between the two buildings themselves were not a difficulty, the problem was their extension within the Palais de l'Europe to provide direct access to the Chamber of the Assembly without disturbing the architecture of the Palais.
Plans and sketches of the solution now envisaged were displayed in the meeting room. Mr. Bernard explained that the architectural conception of the first floor of the Palais de l'Europe, where the footbridge would enter the building, provided for modules of 16 metres in length, corresponding to the large meeting rooms on the floor above, interspersed by modules of 6 metres. Bringing the walkway through a 6 metre module, rather than through a 16 metre module as had originally been envisaged, would not disturb the architecture of the building. In this way, the new building and the Chamber of the Assembly could be linked by the sort of raised walkway that was familiar at airports for instance. Within the Palais de l'Europe, the walkway would curve over a corner of one of the internal gardens, entering the Assembly Chamber area through the Parliamentarians' Lobby. He stated that this latest proposal was perfectly acceptable to him.
The Representative of Switzerland thanked Mr. Bernard for his brief and clear statement and for the work he had put in on this matter. He also thanked the Secretariat for having prepared the plans that were on display. He said that he had allowed himself to be pursuaded that the proposal now before the Committee was the only valid one, and said that he could therefore accept it. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 108 - Item XXVIII
The Representatives of France, Belgium and Italy also expressed their thanks to Mr. Bernard, and said that they could support the project.
The Representative of Sweden said that the project just described by Mr. Bernard was indicative of the ingenuity of the design of the Palais de l'Europe, which had made it possible now to do something that had not originally been foreseen. Mr. Bernard may, of course, have had something of this nature in mind when he designed the building. But one way or another this was an additional element of praise that the architect merited.
The Chairman said that the views just expressed by delegations reflected the feeling of the Committee as a whole. Mr. Bernard would be able to leave the meeting wearing a wreath of laurels. He thanked him again for his trouble in having come to describe the project to the Committee.
Mr. Bernard expressed his gratitude for the kind words that the Chair and delegations had expressed to him. CONFIDENTIAL
- 109 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXIX
XXIX. PREPARATION OF FORTHCOMING MEETINGS
The Secretary to the Committee said that following the decision reached in the course of the meeting (item XXXI), an item XXI needed to be included under heading No. III of the draft agenda for the 303rd meeting (B level) - "Items carried forward from previous meetings", as follows:
"Draft convention on the conservation of European wildlife and natural habitats" (Concl(79)302/XXXI, Add to CM(78)347, CM(79)41, 85 and 91) (Notes No. ...)
The Representative of Norway said that any decision to open a convention for signature on the occasion of a ministerial session should be taken at A level, at which preparations for meetings of the Committee of Ministers were dealt with.
The Chairman took due note, and said that an item on this point would be placed on the agenda for the next A level meeting.
Decisions
The Deputies i. gave final approval to the draft agenda of their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - B level), as it appears at Appendix II to the Conclusions of the 301st meeting; ii. approved the draft agenda of their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level), as it appears at Appendix II to these Conclusions. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 111 - Item XXX(a)
XXX. OTHER BUSINESS a. Dialogue with the Secretary General
1. 7th informal meeting of European Sports Ministers in Athens (12-13 March, 1979)
The Secretary General made the following statement:
"I attended the informal meeting of Sports Ministers (of Council of Europe member States and the states signatory to the European Cultural Convention) which took place at the invitation of the Greek Government in Athens on 12-13 March 1979, and was chaired by Mr. Achilles Karamanlis, Vice Minister of the Presidency of the Government. This meeting was also attended by representatives of the International Olympic Committee and the General Association of International Sports Federations. The official declaration adopted at the close of the one-day meeting strongly condemns sporting contacts with countries practising apartheid, as well as discrimination in sport based on anti-semitism and deplores moreover any attempts to split duly constituted national teams. I have had the text distributed to the members of the Committee.
May I express the most sincere thanks of all participants to the Greek authorities for the generous hospitality and efficient arrangements.
I should like to inform you, at this stage already, that the Sports Ministers unanimously considered it would be useful to meet, at one of their future meetings, Sports Ministers from African countries, and they expressed the wish that this be arranged early in 1980. They are aware that any request to that effect must be submitted to you in due course, and have agreed to begin, without delay, discussions on this specific matter at national level with their respective Foreign Ministers."
The Representative of Sweden wondered which countries had been represented at the meeting and at what level. He also wished to know what African countries the Ministers planned to invite to one of their forthcoming meetings. It should be made perfectly clear, and here he was joined by his Danish, Norwegian and Turkish colleagues, that his country would not participate in any meeting of this kind where representatives of South Africa or other areas in Southern Africa under white supremacy would be present. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 112 - Item XXX(a)
The Secretary General replied that Ministers responsible for sports matters from Cyprus, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Portugal and the United Kingdom had attended the Athens meeting, while eight other countries were also represented at high level. He himself would find it difficult to imagine, given the strong condemnation of apartheid to which he had just referred, that the Sports Ministers even envisaged including South Africa or any other Southern African territories practising apartheid in the proposed meeting. They had not specified in detail which countries might be asked to participate. He would have the meeting report circulated in draft form and in one language at the earliest possible moment.
2. Visit to the Vatican
The Secretary General made the following statement:
"On 15 March I visited the Vatican, where I was received in private audience by His Holiness Pope John-Paul II. The Holy Father asked me about priorities and preoccupations for the work of the Council of Europe. In this respect, too, we discussed at length practical aspects of the Council's activities in the human rights field, in relation to the Pope's own opinion expressed in his encyclical Redemptor Hominis, published that same day.
His Holiness told me that after his forthcoming journey to Poland, he would consider further travels and among them a likely visit to Strasbourg. The possible timing and circumstances of such a visit, as I have mentioned, would only begin to be considered on his return from Poland.
I also had talks with two high dignitaries, Monsignori Casaroli and Caprio, ranging over the role of the Church in European affairs. Monsignor Caprio expressed interest in a possible exhibition by the Vatican on art in religion over the ages. This could be organised after the exhibitions in Italy, Portugal and others that are envisaged."
The Representative of the Netherlands remarked that the Committee had been informed of this visit, by the Deputy Secretary General, only 2 days in advance, in the course of its 301st meeting at B level (13-15 March). He hoped that such late notifications could be avoided in the future. CONFIDENTIAL
- 113 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXX(a)
The Chairman considered that visits to or by dignitaries of non-member States fell clearly within the remit of this Committee.
The Representative of Switzerland agreed with the Chairman and added that, in his opinion, the Secretary General had to obtain the authorisation of this Committee before undertaking any visits to non-member States.
The Secretary General remarked that, in this case, it had not been possible to inform the Committee until shortly before he went. In fact the final arrangements with the Vatican had been made at a very late stage owing to the sudden death of Cardinal Villot.
3. European Museum of the Year Award
The Secretary General made the following statement:
"On 19 March in Aachen, I presented the 1978 European Museum of the Year Award to the Schloss Rheydt Museum Mönchengladbach. This was the second time the award had been made. It is run, as you know, under the auspices of the Council of Europe by a small independent committee. Its main financial support comes, for the present, from IBM, and it is hoped that this will continue to be extended for the 1979 Award, which would be the absolute limit for the IBM commitment. So, if this highly commendable enterprise is to continue, fresh sources of finance will have to be found. The annual ordinary expenditure is estimated at something between 300,000 and 350,000 French francs. One conceivable solution suggested by Mr. Richard Hoggart, the President of the committee, was that the Council of Europe's member States should share out the burden between themselves. Maybe, if this is considered favourably, I would recommend creating another special fund, more or less attached to the Cultural Fund."
The Representative of Sweden hoped to see, in due course, a document on Mr. Hoggart's suggestion, including its budgetary implications.
The Representative of Ireland thought that the matter required careful attention, especially as there was also a Council of Europe Museum Prize. The document to be prepared should spell out what connection there was or should be between the Council of Europe Museum Prize and the European Museum of the Year Award.
The Secretary General said he would be happy to submit the paper called for and recalled that his role had merely been on of an intermediary between Mr. Hoggart and this Committee. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 114 - Item XXX(a)
4. Forthcoming visits to New York and Washington
The Secretary General made the following statement:
"May I take this opportunity to inform you of my forthcoming visit to the United Nations for discussions with Dr. Waldheim and his Under Secretaries General on 24 and 25 April 1979. The main purpose of this meeting is to discuss questions of common interest regarding co-operation between the two organisations in the spirit of the agreement of 19 November 1971 between the Council of Europe and the United Nations. Similar meetings have taken place in the past on a regular basis, usually once a year, the last one on 22 March 1978.
I am looking forward to meeting on that occasion the Permanent Representatives of the Council of Europe member States to the United Nations. When the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers, Mr. van der Klaauw, was here on 29 January last, we discussed the importance of ensuring a feed-back to New York on United Nations matters examined in Strasbourg and Mr. van der Klaauw very kindly undertook to give the necessary instructions to ensure good liaison through the Netherlands Mission in New York. I would like to thank through you, Mr. Chairman, the Netherlands authorities for the assistance they will provide in making the arrangements. I trust we shall also have an opportunity at that meeting to review questions of particular interest to this Organisation and others relating to your discussions here on certain items on the agenda of the United Nations General Assembly.
Following my visit to New York, I shall pay a courtesy visit to Washington on 26 and 27 April in response to an invitation. I shall have discussions at the State Department to maintain and develop contacts already established. I understand that I shall again meet on that occasion Mrs. Patricia Derian (now Mrs. Carter) and members of her staff. I shall most likely also have talks at the Congress about securing better US participation at our Parliamentary Assembly for the debate on the OECD report and similar questions of common interest."
The Representative of Switzerland said he could have no objections to the Secretary General's visit to the United Nations in New York as this was an international organisation with which it was necessary to have a permanent dialogue. He wished, however, to be informed of the points which the Secretary General intended to raise with Dr. Waldheim and his officials. CONFIDENTIAL
- 115 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXX(a)
On Friday 30 March, the Secretary General stated that the discussion on co-operation between the United Nations and the Council of Europe at Secretariat level generally included information given to him by Dr. Waldheim about main items likely to be included in the forthcoming United Nations General Assembly agenda and a preliminary review of what might be discussed in Strasbourg at the Committee of Ministers level with experts from capitals. Vice versa, he informed Dr. Waldheim about activities undertaken in Strasbourg, including some summary information on the exchanges of views in the Committee of Ministers, having a bearing on past, ongoing and future work of the United Nations. Special attention was given to human rights activities on both sides, eg. Dr. Waldheim briefed him on developments and proposals regarding a United Nations human rights commissioner, a United Nations human rights court, United Nations draft conventions on hostages', political prisoners, torture, etc. Other specific questions which were sometimes brought up related to the activities of the Council of Europe's Division on Crime Problems and those of the UN Division on Crime Prevention and Control, as well as to the work in the United Nations and the Council of Europe on phamacodependence or drug abuse.
Dr. Waldheim, on these occasions, moreover gave the Secretary General of the Council of Europe quite a lot of first-hand information on the United Nations Organisation and its Secretariat, besides a general run-down of major problems being tackled by, or facing his Organisation.
A rather administrative problem to be discussed again with the competent UN officials in New York was the exchange of information and documents at Secretariat level, ie. the question of how to arrange for the expeditious despatch of a considerable number of United Nations documents of direct interest to the Council of Europe Secretariat at Strasbourg. While theoretically there was no problem, in practice there were still some difficulties which needed to be sorted out, eg. selection of the most interesting UN documents and prompt despatch by air from New York.
The Secretary General of the Council of Europe used, of course, this opportunity of bringing to Dr. Waldheim' s attention any difficulties particular Secretariat departments had in receiving information from the United Nations Secretariat on certain activities and studies, or in participating in meetings of the United Nations and its specialised agencies.
Sometimes the Secretaries General also discussed the attendance of UN officials at part-sessions of the Parliamentary Assembly, as well as visits and contacts of UN officials at the Council of Europe Secretariat. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl (79)302 - 116 - Item XXX(a)
In reply to a question by the Permanent Representative of Sweden, the Secretary General added that his talks with Dr. Waldheim usually lasted about two hours, followed by a working lunch with Dr. Waldheim in the presence of senior UN officials.
5. Message by the Secretary General in Forum 1/79
Following a comment made by a delegation concerning the message published in issue 1/79 of Forum, the Chairman, presuming to interpret the feeling of the Committee and hoping thereby to prevent a lengthy debate, greatly regretted the tone and content of the Secretary General's article, which to the naive reader must suggest an organisation beset by discord. Surely it must be a primary duty of a Secretary General to show to the outside world that the Organisation did its upmost to stand united in its various policies. The appearance of an article of this kind indeed led him to begin to doubt the wisdom of those of the Secretary General's advisers who were concerned with this article.
The United Kingdom Representative, while wishing to postpone final judgement on the article until he had had the occasion to read it in English, asked himself whether in Britain you could really hear "the sound of machine guns" so much more often than in Strasbourg.
The Representative of Austria thought that the article could have a bad effect for the Organisation since it suggested to the public that serious "conflicts of authority" existed between the Ministers' Deputies and the Secretary General. It was true that on the inside cover of Form it stated that "articles ... are the sole responsibility of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Council of Europe". This could, however, not conceivably apply to the Secretary General in his capacity as the highest representative of the Secretariat. Furthermore, the Secretary General had drawn Conventions which had received few signatures or ratifications but omitted the large number of legal instruments which had been signed or ratified by many or most member States. Moreover, when calling for a strengthening of the role of conferences of specialised ministers and of their decisionmaking power in lieu of the Foreign Ministers, the Secretary General seemed to overlook the fact that their function had been the subject of lengthy negotiations between all member States. In sum he thought, and here he was joined by his Swiss colleague, that the article was such as to merit the attention of the Stimulating Committee at its next meeting. CONFIDENTIAL
- 117 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXX(a)
The Representative of Cyprus wondered how the Secretary General could publish, in the official Council of Europe periodical, an article which in his view risked undermining the reputation of the Organisation. He would not have objected had the Secretary General published a similar article elsewhere after his term of office had come to an end, but he felt he should definitely not have done so before then.
The Representative of Switzerland shared the critical views expressed by the previous speakers and said that what was involved was a faulty application of the new information policy.
The Secretary General first of all thanked one delegation for the kind words it had had to say about his article. He was at the same time rather surprised at the negative comments expressed by certain other members of the Committee. He defied anyone to count the number of times that he had - in his tireless work on behalf of the Council of Europe over the past five years, in articles, speeches, etc. pronounced all over Europe - upheld and promoted the interests of the Council of Europe. Could it really be so that Representatives on the Committee of Ministers in an Organisation which rightly prided itself on being a bulwark of democracy and freedom of opinion, could not tolerate it when an outgoing Secretary General in a highly personal message sums up his term and speaks out on issues which he considers important - all in a constructive effort to promote the interests of the Organisation? If matters so relatively innocent as the frequency of meetings of the Committee of Ministers, the role of the European Conferences of Specialised Ministers and the duties of the Secretary General - all of them having been discussed publicly in the Parliamentary Assembly and by his predecessors Mr. Toncic-Sorinj and Mr. Smithers - could not be raised, how could the Organisation ever hope to be able to solve the many important problems facing it? The role of the Secretary General was not only to represent the Organisation, but also to point in new directions and to stimulate debate. He was confident that the members of the Committee, when reading through his article for a second time, would come to realise that some of their comments might have been too abrupt and harsh, voiced as they were in the heat of the moment.
The Chairman referred to his previous summing up and noted the Committee approved it unanimously. In as far as the Secretary General's statement was concerned, he stated that if he were allowed to summarise it, it would amount to the Secretary General being perfectly right and all the interventions of various delegations being all beside the point. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 118 - Item XXX(a)
6. Other matters
Other matters raised during the dialogue were discussed in restricted session and are reported in Addenda I and II to these Conclusions, which have been distributed to Heads of Delegation only.
Decisions
The Deputies
i. asked the Secretary General to distribute as soon as possible the meeting report of the informal meeting of European Sports Ministers in Athens on 12 and 13 March 1979, and in particular to provide further information about the Sports Ministers' wish to meet Sports Ministers from African countries;
ii. agreed to resume consideration of the matter referred to under (i) above at their 304th meeting (May 1979 - A level). CONFIDENTIAL
- 119 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXX(b)
b. CDCC's programme for 1979 Meeting of experts on the mobility of students, research workers and teachers (London, 24-26 April 1979)
Decision
The Deputies took note of the modification to the CDCC's programme to the effect that the meeting of experts on the mobility of students, research workers and teachers, would take place in London and not in Strasbourg (24-26 April 1979). CONFIDENTIAL
- 121 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXX(c)
c. Rules for technical assistance relating to the integrated conservation of the cultural heritage of monuments and sites (CM(79)99)
Decision
The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 305th meeting (May 1979 - B level). CONFIDENTIAL
- 123 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXX(d)
d. Composition of the Budget Committee and geographical distribution of category A posts Suggestions by the Belgian delegation (CM(79)97 and 98)
The Representative of Belgium said that he had asked for this sub- item to be included under "Other business" to give him an opportunity to introduce the suggestions made by his delegation in CM(79)97 and 98. He had not envisaged a debate at the present meeting on the substance of the suggestions - that could take place at the 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level).
Geographical distribution (CM(79)97) He said that certain events that had occurred at the beginning of the year, and which had given rise to a degree of animosity, had led his delegation, and he believed others, to conclude that the working of the guidelines adopted by the Committee of Ministers in January 1978 (Concl(78)281/XIX and Appendix IX) was unsatisfactory. The Belgian delegation was suggesting improvements in three areas:
- inclusion of the specially appointed officials in the points system;
- additional weighting of one extra point for grade A7 and A6 posts on account of their importance in the top management structure of the Secretariat;
- inclusion of the Pharmacopoeia Secretariat in the calculations (or alternatively exclusion of all posts of a technical nature - his delegation had no firm position on this).
Budget Committee (CM(79)98) This body had existed since the earliest days of the Organisation, but the arrangements governing its composition had never undergone any substantial change. The last minor adjustment had taken place in mid-1974, and since then the membership of the Council of Europe had increased from 17 to 21 States. The suggestions made in CM(79)98 would result in the membership of the Budget Committee being increased from 8 to 10 experts, and each of the four groups of contributors (major, medium, minor and "minimal") being represented on it. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 124 - Item XXX(d)
The Representative of Spain said that he was most receptive to the Belgian suggestions. His position was very similar to that of his Belgian colleague.
The Representative of Switzerland said that he would communicate his comments in writing for inclusion in the Conclusions. The comments so received are as follows:
"In the opinion of the Representative of Switzerland, who had not yet had an opportunity to contact his authorities, the Belgian proposal certainly represented an improvement by comparison with the existing system. Firstly, he agreed with the general exclusion of technical posts. He also agreed with the suggestion to assign points to the specially appointed officials and extra points to staff of grades A6 and A7. What to his mind remained to be decided was the question of geographical distribution of managerial staff, ie. the three specially appointed officials, directors, heads of department and heads of units answerable directly to the Secretary General (Private Office, Youth Centre, Youth Foundation). Of these 18 persons the nationality of 14 covered only four countries, while the 17 other member States were represented by four people in all; this situation was certainly unsatisfactory."
Decisions
The Deputies i. agreed to consider at their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level) the suggestions made by the Belgian delegation in CM(79)97 (geographical distribution) and CM(79)98 (Budget Committee); ii. invited delegations in a position to do so to submit comments on the Belgian suggestions in writing in good time for their circulation prior to the 303rd meeting (A level). CONFIDENTIAL
- 125 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXX(e)
e. Special Representative of the Council of Europe for National Refugees and Over-Population
The Representative of France said that his authorities were of the opinion that, following the death of Mr Schneiter, the question of the Governing Body of the Council of Europe Resettlement Fund should be settled immediately. As for the CAHRS he pointed out that his authorities would welcome any proposal regarding this committee's future structure, including the setting up of a steering committee to replace the CAHRS. It was important to keep a clear distinction between Mr Schneiter's two functions; that of Special Representative could be discussed later.
With respect to the Governing Body of the Resettlement Fund he said that the Committee of Ministers should let it know whether it saw any objection to the election of a new chairman taking place immediately.
The Representative of Cyprus shared the views of the Representative of France.
The Representative of Switzerland associated himself with the Chairman's tribute (1). In a telegram sent to Mrs Pierre Schneiter, the Head of the Federal Political Department, whilst expressing his deep sadness, had recalled that this tireless defender of the migrant workers would remain, because of his generosity and his warm heart, "The" Special Representative for national refugees and "The" creator of the Resettlement Fund. Thanks to Mr Pierre Schneiter, the Council of Europe's work concerning refugees, population problems and the problems of foreign workers had reached its cruising speed.
As from now, the situation had to be examined from four angles. First, the Representative of Switzerland thought that it was not necessary to appoint a new Special Representative. Therefore, second, there could no longer be a Special Representative's Advisory Committee within the meaning of Resolution(56)5. Third, like all the other committees, the Governing Body of the Resettlement Fund would have to appoint its Chairman by election. Lastly, and in the meantime, the CAHRS would have to be chaired by one of its Vice-Chairmen. Regarding the implementation of Sector 9 of the Medium-Term Plan, the Representative of Switzerland recalled his authorities' opinion that it was wrong to make the Council of Europe undertake two different types of social activity, one for nationals and one for aliens. A single Steering Committee should be made responsible for Sectors 5, 6 and 9.
The Representative of Sweden shared the views of the Representative of Switzerland with respect to the Governing Body.
As for the CAHRS he thought that the deletion in the specific terms of reference of the CAHRS of the reference to the chairmanship of the Special Representative would solve the problem. He believed that any change in the status or structure of the CAHRS before the Conference of European Ministers responsible for Migration Affairs would not be necessary.
(1) See first page of the introduction to these Conclusions. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 126 - Item XXX(e)
The Representative of the Netherlands, supported by the Representative of Portugal, said that his authorities would be in favour of replacing the CAHRS by a steering committee. The Representative of Turkey asked the Secretariat for clarification regarding the procedure to be followed by the Governing Body of the Resettlement Fund.
As far as the future of the CAHRS was concerned, he associated himself with the view that the CAHRS should be transformed into a Steering Committee.
The Deputy Director of Economic and Social Affairs said that, in accordance with Article 9(k) of the Articles of Agreement of the Council of Europe Resettlement Fund, the Governing Board had sole authority to designate its Chairman.
The Chairman noted that no questions had been raised concerning the advisability of the Governing Board applying Article 9(k).
Decisions
The Deputies
i. instructed the Secretariat to prepare a document on the issues concerning the Special Representative's Advisory Committee (CAHRS) which should be settled following the death of the Special Representative;
ii. agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - A level). CONFIDENTIAL
- 127 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXX(f) f. Stimulating Committee on Information
The Chairman reported on the 2nd meeting of the Stimulating Committee, which had taken place on 28 March following the meeting of the Joint Committee. He said that the meeting had given rise to no clashes between the members of the Committee but had proved yet again an excellent opportunity for airing views and ideas.
Members of the Assembly had referred to the information budget and the possibilities for increasing the appropriations under the sub- head concerned to enable Forum to appear in a greater number of non- official languages in accordance with the decision taken by the Deputies at their 297th meeting in December 1978. Mrs von Bothmer in particular had referred to an initiative which she had taken with the German authorities in Bonn and hoped that all member governments would respond to an appeal for increased appropriations.
No reference had been made to the Secretary General's article in Forum (of item XXX(a) of the agenda of the present meeting) as that matter had already been extensively covered during the Joint Committee meeting.
The question of publicity for the Urban Renewal Campaign had been raised and the priority which should be assigned to it, bearing in mind funds available in the information budget. The Directorate of Press and Information Services would look carefully at this matter; the national committees concerned with the preparation of the Campaign would also be closely involved with generating publicity nationally.
An account had been given of the discussion on the 30th Anniversary of the Council of Europe but no special initiatives would be forthcoming from the Stimulating Committee.
The Parliamentarians had referred to paragraph 9(b)(i) of Assembly Recommendation 767 concerning the possibility of holding from time to time Sessions of the Committee of Ministers in the various member States. They underlined the impact and political spin-off that such Sessions would have, not only for the host state but also for the Council as a whole. Of course, this matter had been dealt with in paragraph 13.2 of the Working Party's report (CM(78)216 rev). However, when delegations were sounded on the Working Party's recommendations, it was not clear whether a majority would emerge to take any action on this matter. It might be that the Assembly would address a specific Recommendation to the Committee of Ministers on this particular aspect of information policy. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 128 - Item XXX(f)
The Representative of Luxembourg asked the Secretariat for information concerning the title of the magazine Forum and whether there were any difficulties caused by the co-existence of the magazine of the European Communities entitled Euroforum and Forum.
The Deputy Director of Press and Information Services said that the Secretariat had chosen the title Forum because it was readily understandable in all member States of the Council of Europe. The previous publication had different titles according to the language in which it was published. In July 1975, the Council of Europe issued a newsletter entitled Euroforum designed to keep NGO's informed of intergovernmental activities. In January 1976, the Commission of the European Communities brought out its own magazine with the same title. When questioned about whether it was aware of the existence of the Council of Europe magazine of the same name, the Commission had replied in the negative and added that the fact that the 2 magazines existed side by side would not in its opinion cause any difficulties. CONFIDENTIAL
- 129 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXXI
XXXI. DRAFT CONVENTION ON THE CONSERVATION OF EUROPEAN WILDLIFE AND NATURAL HABITATS
(Concl(79)301/XXVI, Add to CM(78)347, CM(79)41, 85 and 91 and Corr)
The Chairman invited the Deputies to give priority to the discussion of certain important clauses of the draft Convention, on which opinions still differed, and to reach decisions on them, if necessary by taking indicative votes.
1. The Preamble
The Chairman noted that the Deputies agreed on the removal of the square brackets around the 2nd and 3rd paragraphs and on keeping the original wording, viz:
"Considering that the aim of the Council of Europe is to achieve greater unity between its members;
Considering the wish of the Council of Europe to co-operate with other states in the field of nature conservation; ...... "
2. Article 15, paragraph 2
The Chairman called for an indicative vote on the alternative providing for comments on the part of the Committee of Ministers.
Result: 5 for, 11 against, 3 abstentions.
The Chairman noted that the Committee agreed to the amendment proposed by Spain (CM(79)9l Corr.). Paragraphs 2 and 3 would accordingly read as follows:
"2. Any amendment proposed in accordance with the provisions of the preceding paragraph shall be examined by the Standing Committee which: a. for amendments to Articles 1 to 11, shall submit the text adopted by a 3/4 majority of the votes cast to the Contracting Parties for acceptance; CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - 130 - Item XXXI
b. for amendments to Articles 12 to 24, shall submit the text adopted by a 3/4 majority of the votes cast to the Committee of Ministers for approval. After its approval, this text shall be forwarded to the Contracting Parties for acceptance.
3. Any amendment shall enter into force on the thirtieth day after all the Contracting Parties have informed the Secretary General that they have accepted it".
3. Article 16, paragraphs 2 and 3
Following the acceptance of the Spanish amendment, these paragraphs would read as follows:
"2. Any amendment proposed in accordance with the provisions of the preceding paragaph shall be examined by the Standing Committee, which may adopt it by a two-thirds majority of the votes cast. The text adopted shall be forwarded to the Contracting Parties.
3. Three months after its adoption by the Standing Committee and unless one-third of the Contracting Parties have notified objections, any amendment shall enter into force for those Contracting Parties which have not notified objections".
The Spanish proposal that "two-thirds majority of the votes cast" be replaced by "two-thirds majority of the Contracting Parties" and the new wording for paragraph 2 proposed by the Secretariat were not discussed (cf. CM(79)91 Corr.).
4. Article 17, paragraph 2
The Representative of France reminded the meeting that there were several reasons why on principle his authorities could not agree to recourse to arbitration by the President of the International Court of Justice. CONFIDENTIAL
- 131 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Item XXXI
The Chairman noted that there was agreement on the version providing for arbitration by the President of the European Court of Human Rights.
With regards to the Netherlands proposal that a time-limit be set for the designation of an arbitrator by the person who is not one of the Parties (CM(79)91), the Representative of France said that to set an additional time-limit would be not only unusual but unnecessary, since no provision was made for action if it was not respected.
The Representative of the Netherlands replied that to set a time- limit would make sure that the procedure did not go on indefinitely.
The Deputy Director of Legal Affairs said that the Netherlands proposal would not place any legal obligation on the President of the European Court of Human Rights but rather a moral one. It was indeed not very necessary, but it should not cause any difficulties.
An indicative vote on the Netherlands proposal resulted in: 12 in favour, 2 against and 3 abstentions. Paragraph 2 would accordingly read as follows:
"2. Any dispute between Contracting Parties concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention which has not been settled on the basis of the provisions of the preceding paragraph or by negotiation between the Parties concerned shall, unless the said Parties agree otherwise, be submitted, at the request of one of them, to arbitration. Each Party shall designate an arbitrator and the two arbitrators shall designate a third arbitrator. If one of the Parties has not designated its arbitrator within the three months following the request for arbitration, he shall be designated at the request of the other Party by the President of the European Court of Human Rights within a further three months' period. The same procedure shall be observed if the arbitrators cannot agree on the choice of the third arbitrator within the three months following the designation of the first two arbitrators".
5. Article 19, paragraph 1
The Representative of Belgium withdrew his proposal that the words "and non-member States which have participated in its elaboration" be deleted.
Decision
The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 303rd meeting (April 1979 - B level), with a view to agreeing on the text of the draft Convention on the Conservation of Wildlife and Natural Habitats. CONFIDENTIAL
- a1 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302
APPENDIX I
AGENDA OF THE 302ND MEETING OF THE MINISTERS' DEPUTIES (A level)
(Strasbourg, Monday 26 March 1979 at 3 pm)
1. Adoption of the agenda (Notes No. 2851 of 23.3.79)
2. State of written procedures (Notes No. 2852 of 19.3.79)
II.
Political and General Policy Questions
3. Committee of Ministers - Preparation of the 64th Session - (Concl(79)300/IV, CM(79)76 of 27.2.79) (Notes No. 2853 of 21.3.79)
4. Joint Committee - Preparation - (Concl(79)300/VI) (Notes No. 2854 of 21.3.79)
5. Situation in Cyprus - (Concl(79)300/V) (Notes No. 2855 of 12.3.79)
6. Human Rights in Uruguay - Written Question No. 217 by Mr Boucheny - (CM(79)75 of 1.3.79) (Notes No. 2856 of 16.3.79)
7. Freedom of movement of the members of the Parliamentary Assembly in the member States of the Council of Europe - Written Question No. 215 - (Concl(79)300/VII, CM(78)328 and 329, CM(79)17) (Notes No. 2857 of 19.3.79) CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - a2 - Appendix I
8. Situation in the Mediterranean Area (General Policy of the Council of Europe) - Recommendation 853 - (Concl(79)300/III(a) (Notes No. 2858 of 14.3.79)
Human Rights
9. Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case Luedicke, Belkacem and Koç - Application of Article 54 of the European Convention on Human Rights - (Concl(79)298/XVI, Letter HD/C47 of 4.12.78) (Notes No. 2733 of 19.12.78)
10. Arthur Hilton against the United Kingdom - Decision to be taken under Article 32 of the European Convention on Human Rights - (Concl(79)300/IX, Letter HC/C27 of 26 June 1978) (Notes No. 2859 of 20.3.79)
11. Draft statement on race and racial prejudice of UNESCO - Written Question No. 211 by Mr Portheine - (Concl(79)300/X, CM(78)227, 335, 339, CM(79)47 and Add. and CM(79)84 of 12.3.79) (Notes No. 2860 of 9.3.79)
Legal Questions
12. The Hague Academy of International Law - (Concl(78)297/XXVI(b), CM(79)58 of 1.3.79) (Notes No. 2861 of 19.3.79)
13. Resolutions of the Committee of Ministers - (Concl(79)300/XI, CM(78)278, CM(79)42 and 71 of 8.3.79) (Notes No. 2800 of 26.2.79)
14. Committee of Experts on violence in present-day society (PC-R-VS) - Observer status of the Commission of the European Communities - (Concl(79)300/XIII, CM(79)6) (Notes No. 2802 of 26.1.79)
15. Committee on the Mass Media (CAHMM) - Report of the 4th meeting (Strasbourg, 11-15 December 1978) - (Concl(79)300/XV, CM(79)13, 34 and Add. I-V and 44) (Notes No. 2803 of 21.2.79)
16. Ad hoc Conference of European Ministers responsible for Public Security - (Concl(78)300/XVI, CM(79)18) (Notes No. 2804 of 6.2.79) CONFIDENTIAL
- a3 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Appendix I
17. Terrorism in Europe - Recommendation 852 and Order No. 376 - (Concl(79)300/III(a)) (Notes No. 2862 of 16.3.79)
Economic and Social Questions
18. Implementation and revision of the European Social Charter - Recommendation 839 - (Concl(79)300/XVII, CM(78)315) (Notes No. 2863 of 21.3.79)
19. Tripartite Conference on Employment - (Concl(79)300/XXXI(c), CM(79)56) (Notes No. 2864 of 14.3.79)
20. Relations with Management and Labour - (Concl(79)300/XXXI(i) CM(79)100 of 27.3.79) (Notes No. 2865 of 16.3.79) Press and Information
21. 30th Anniversary of the Council of Europe - (Concl(79)300/XXXI(f), CM(79)46 and 94 of 27.3.79) (Notes No. 2866 of 20.3.79)
Education, Culture and Sport
22. Organisation of a 3rd Joint Conference (Council of Europe/European Conference of Ministers of Transport) on Road Safety Education in Schools - (Concl(79)300/XIX, CM(78)343, CM(79)82 of 9.3.79) (Notes No. 2867 of 16.3.79)
23. European Cultural Co-operation - Recommendation 850 - (Concl(79)300/III(a)) (Notes No. 2868 of 20.3.79)
Administrative Questions
24. Procedure for the appointment of members of the Board of Auditors - (Concl(78)297/XXII, CM(79)62) (Notes No. 2869 of 16.3.79)
25. Compatibility between Resolution(77)23 and (77)24 - (Concl(78)297/XXIII, CM(79)96 of 27.3.79) (Notes No. 2870 of 22.3.79)
26. Travel expenses of government experts - (Concl(78)295/XII, CM(78)89, CM(79)26) (Notes No. 2871 of 19.3.79) CM/Del/Concl (79)302 - a4 - Appendix I
27. Ad hoc Committee of Administrative Experts (CAHEA)
a. Presence of representatives of the Staff Committee in meetings of the CAHEA - (Concl(79)300/XXVIII,CM(79)51 of 14.3.79) (Notes No. 2872 of 19.3.79)
b. 8th Activity Report - (Concl(78)290/XXII and XXIII, CM(79)50) (Notes No. 2873 of 21.3.79)
c. 9th Activity Report - (Concl(78)286/XXIX(c), CM(79)65 of 27.2.79) (Notes No. 2874 of 19.3.79)
d. 18th Meeting Report - (CM(79)77 of 5.3.79) (Notes No. 2875 of 16.3.79)
28. European Parliament - Facilities - (Concl(79)300/XXXI(j)) (Notes No. 2876 of 16.3.79 and Add of 21.3.79)
29. Preparation of forthcoming meetings (Notes No. 2877 of 23.3.79)
30. Other Business
a. Dialogue with the Secretary General
b. CDCC' s programme for 1979 - Meeting of experts on the mobility of students, research workers and teachers (London, 24-26 April 1979) (Notes No. 2895 rev. of 21.3.79)
c. Rules for technical assistance relating to the integrated conservation of the cultural heritage of monuments and sites (CM(79)99 of 27.3.79) (Notes No. 2897 of 26.3.79)
d. Composition of the Budget Committee and geographical distribution of category A posts - Suggestions by the Belgian delegation - (CM(79)97 and 98) (Notes No. 2899 of 27.3.79)
e. Special Representative of the Council of Europe for National Refugees and Over-Population
f. Stimulating Committee CONFIDENTIAL
- a5 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302 Appendix I
III.
Items carried forward from previous meetings
31. Draft Convention on the conservation of European Wildlife and natural habitats - (Concl(79)301/XXVI, Add. to CM(78)347, CM(79)41, 85 and 91 of 19.3.79 and Corr. of 28.3.79) (Notes No. 2896 of 21.3.79) CONFIDENTIAL
- a7 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302
APPENDIX II
DRAFT AGENDA OF THE 303RD MEETING OF THE MINISTERS' DEPUTIES (A level)
(Strasbourg, Monday 23 April 1979 at 3 p.m.)
[Items I to XXI will be discussed at B level (see Appendix II to the Conclusions of the 301st meeting and item XXIX of the agenda of the present meeting)]
22. Adoption of the agenda (Notes No. 2900 of ...)
Political and General Policy Questions
23. Preparation of the next exchange of views on the CSCE - (Concl(79)302/III) (Notes No. 2901 of ...)
24. Preparation of the next exchange of views on the United Nations - (Concl(79)302/III) (Notes No. 2902 of ...)
25. Committee of Ministers - Preparation of the 64th Session - (Concl(79)302/III, CM(79)76 and 112 of ... and ...) (Notes No. 2903 of ...)
26. Election of the Secretary General - (CM(79)113 of ...) (Notes No. 2904 of ...)
27. Situation in Cyprus - (Concl(79)302/V) (Notes No. 2905 of ...)
28. Freedom of movement of the members of the Parliamentary Assembly in the member States of the Council of Europe - Written Question No. 215 - (Concl(79)302/VII, CM(78)328 and 329, CM(79)17) (Notes No. 2906 of ...)
29. Situation in the Mediterranean Area (General Policy of the Council of Europe) - Recommendation 853 - (Concl(79)302/VIII) (Notes No. 2907 of ...)
30. Human Rights in Uruguay - Written Question No. 217 by Mr Boucheny - (Concl(79)302/VI, CM(79)75 and 118 of ...) (Notes No. 2908 of ...)
N.B. In accordance with the deadline rules for the despatch of reference documents and Notes on the agenda, the date limits are 26 March and 13 April 1979 respectively. CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - a8 - Appendix II
Human Rights
31. H. Eggs against Switzerland - Decision to be taken under Article 32 of the European Convention on Human Rights - (Concl(79)298/XI, Letter HD/C16 of 24 April 1978) (Notes No. 2606 of 6.10.78)
32. 20th anniversary of the European Court of Human Rights and the 300th anniversary of the Habeas Corpus Act - Written Question No. 218 by Lord Morris - (CM(79)90 of ...) (Notes No. 2910 of ...)
33. Arthur Hilton against the United Kingdom - Decision to be taken under Article 32 of the European Convention on Human Rights - (Concl(79)302/X, Letter HD/C27 of 26 June 1978) (Notes No. 2911 of ...)
Legal Questions
34. Ad hoc Conference of European Ministers responsible for Public Security - (Concl(78)302/XVI, CM(79)18) (Notes No. 2912 of ...)
35. Terrorism in Europe - Recommendation 852 and Order No. 376 - (Concl(79)302/XVII) (Notes No. 2913 of ...)
Economic and Social Questions
36. Implementation and revision of the European Social Charter - Recommendation 839 - (Concl(79)302/XVIII, CM(78)315, CM(79)110 of ...) (Notes No. 2914 of ...)
37. Tripartite Conference on Employment - (Concl(79)302/XIX, CM(79)56) (Notes No. 2915 of ...)
38. Relations with Management and Labour - (Concl(79)302/XX, CM(79)100 and 114 of ...) (Notes No. 2916 of ...) 39. Council of Europe Special Representative for Refugees and Over- Population - (Concl(79)302/XXX(e), CM(79)...) (Notes No. 2917 of ...)
40. Committee of Experts on Pesticides (CD-SP-PE) - Partial Agreement - Observer status of the Commission of the European Communities - (CM(79)106 of ...) (Notes No. 2918 of ...) CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - a9 - Appendix II
Press and Information
41. 30th Anniversary of the Council of Europe - (Concl(79)302/XXI, CM(79)46 and 94) (Notes No. 2919 of ...)
42. Opening of a special account for publications - (Concl(78)293/XVIII, CM(78)59) (Notes No. 2920 of ...)
Education, Culture and Sport
43. Organisation of a 3rd Joint Conference (Council of Europe/European Conference of Ministers of Transport) on Road Safety Education in Schools - (Concl(79)302/XXII, CM(78)343, CM(79)82 and ...) (Notes No. 2921 of ...)
44. European Cultural Co-operation - Recommendation 850 - (Concl(79)302/XXIII) (Notes No. 2922 of 9.4.79)
Administrative Questions
45. Compatibility between Resolutions (77)23 and (77)24 - (Concl(79)302/XXV, CM(79)96 of 27.3.79) (Notes No. 2923 of 9.4.79)
46. Travel expenses of government experts - (Concl(79)302/XXVI, CM(78)89, CM(79)26 and Add. of ...) (Notes No. 2924 of 9.4.79)
47. Reversion of rights to a survivor's pension to widowers of female staff - 161st report of the Co-ordinating Committee of Government Budget Experts - (Concl(78)291/IV, CM(78)193, CM(79)95) (Notes No. 2925 of 9.4.79)
48. Convening of committees - Interpretation of Articles 34, 35 and 36 of Resolution(76)3 - (Concl(79)300/XXVI, CM(79)102 of 28.3.79) (Notes No. 2926 of ...)
49. Ad hoc Committee of Experts for the New Building (CAHNB)
a. Meeting report incorporating final activity reports (Decision No. CM/2/010177) - (CM(79)87) (Notes No. 2927 of 9.4.79)
b. Final activity report (Decision No. CM/83/131078) - (Concl(78)293/ XXII(a), CM(78)191, Add to CM(79)87) (Notes No. 2928 of 9.4.79) CONFIDENTIAL
CM/Del/Concl(79)302 - a10 - Appendix II
50. Geographical distribution of category A posts - Suggestions by the Belgian delegation - (Concl(78)281/XIX and Appendix IX, Concl(79)302/XXX(d), CM(79)97 of 27.3.79) (Notes No. 2929 of ...)
51. Composition of the Budget Committee - Suggestions by the Belgian delegation - (Concl(79)302/XXX(d), CM(79)98) (Notes No. 2930 of ...)
52. Preparation of forthcoming meetings (Notes No. 2931 of ...)
53. Other Business
a. Dialogue with the Secretary General
b. Opening for signature of legal instruments (Notes No. 2932 of ...)
c. Meeting with representatives of national Commissions for UNESCO - Oral report by the Secretariat - (Concl(79)302/XV) (Notes No. 2933 of ...) CONFIDENTIAL
- a11 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302
APPENDIX III (item XIII)
DECISION NO. CM/126/300379
Ad hoc terms of reference
1. Names of relevant committees: ALL STEERING COMMITTEES AND THE CAHRS, CAHED, CAHPC, CAHID, CAHMM AND CAHAR
2. Source of terms of reference: Committee of Ministers
3. Completion date: April 1980
4. Terms of reference:
i. discuss the list drawn up by the Secretariat in accordance with decision (i) under item XIII of the 302nd meeting of the Deputies, and consider which Committee of Ministers' Resolutions should finally be included in it|
ii. express an opinion on the two systems proposed in para. 17 of CM(78)278;
iii. advise on the role they might play in follow-up action on the reports submitted by governments.
5. Other committee(s) to be informed of terms of reference: None. CONFIDENTIAL
- a13 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302
APPENDIX IV (item XIV)
DECISION NO. CM/125/290379
Decision on admission of observers
1. Name of relevant committee: SELECT COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS ON VIOLENCE IN PRESENT-DAY SOCIETY (PC-R-VS)
2. Name of organisation: Commission of the European Communities
3. Date and author of request: Commission of the European Communities (see letter of 28 June 1978 CM(79)6)
4. Whether the observer may The Commission is admitted attend all plenary meetings, to all meetings of the Select or in what circumstances Committee he may attend:
5. Period for which decision This decision is valid for is valid: the duration of the specific terms of reference of the Select Committee. CONFIDENTIAL
- a15 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302
APPENDIX V (item XVIII)
DECISION NO. CM/127/300379
Ad hoc terms of reference
1. Name of relevant committee: STEERING COMMITTEE FOR SOCIAL AFFAIRS (CDAS)
2. Source of terms of reference: Committee of Ministers
3. Completion date: December 1979
4. Terms of reference:
To give an opinion on parts 8A, 8B and 8C, with the exception of items 8C I 1.1c (strengthening of the Secretariat) and 8C I 1.2, first paragraph (improved form of questionnaire), of Recommendation 839, bearing in mind that any revision of the Charter should be designed to encourage and not to discourage ratification by member States which have not yet ratified it.
5. Other committee(s) to be Ad hoc Committee of Experts informed of terms of reference: for the Follow-up to the Declaration on Human Rights (CAHDH). CONFIDENTIAL
- a17 - CM/Del/Concl(79)302
APPENDIX VI (item XVIII)
DECISION NO. CM/128/300379
Ad hoc terms of reference
1. Name of relevant committee: AD HOC COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS FOR THE FOLLOW- UP TO THE DECLARATION ON HUMAN RIGHTS (CAHDH)
2. Source of terms of reference: Committee of Ministers
3. Completion date: December 1979
4. Terms of reference:
To give an opinion on part 8B and item 8C II of Recommendation 839, bearing in mind that any revision of the Charter should be designed to encourage and not to discourage ratification by member States which have not yet ratified it.
5. Other committee(s) to be informed Steering Committee for of terms of reference: Social Affairs (CDAS)